Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW

Re^3: Minimizing PAR performance hit

by fizbin (Chaplain)
on Jan 08, 2007 at 16:32 UTC ( #593564=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: Minimizing PAR performance hit
in thread Minimizing PAR performance hit

Given that, it may also be worth posting a separate SOPW question about what you're doing that requires Math::Pari. There may be other ways to do it that would involve modules without nearly as much baggage.
@/=map{[/./g]}qw/.h_nJ Xapou cets krht ele_ r_ra/; map{y/X_/\n /;print}map{pop@$_}@/for@/

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Minimizing PAR performance hit
by gaal (Parson) on Jan 08, 2007 at 17:13 UTC
    I use Net::SSH::Perl, which relies on Crypt::DSA, which in turn uses Math::Pari. This last isn't strictly required... so long as you don't mind 30-second-long login times to SSH servers. :-(

    Regardless, the RAM overhead of PAR seems to be about 8-9MB...

      Well, so long as you must use Net::SSH::Perl, yes, you're bound to PARI. I'll note though that from what hints you've provided about your execution environment, you aren't in a situation where you'd really be taking advantage of Net::SSH::Perl's main advantage, which is that you don't have to create an extra process in order to ssh - this is a boon in a long-running perl process that will ssh frequently, or on a system with a high per-process overhead (such as windows). You don't seem to be in such a situation.

      Could you also accomplish what you need to accomplish by using the ssh command-line client already there on the machine you're going to be running on and using Net::SSH, IPC::Open3, or possibly even Expect?

      (Note that Expect comes with its own shared-library baggage, but likely less than Pari's)

      @/=map{[/./g]}qw/.h_nJ Xapou cets krht ele_ r_ra/; map{y/X_/\n /;print}map{pop@$_}@/for@/
        I'd very much like to avoid Expect, and I'd prefer to avoid Net::SSH if only because my code is already tested and written with something else. If the performance problems prove too severe then yes, I can and will fall back on that. (I say this often: Aren't I glad I have a test suite!)

        But it'd be pretty sad if the tool I was relying on to ease deployment is limiting my choice of modules, so I'm not giving up yet.

        (To clarify: without PAR the performance is acceptable.)

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://593564]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (4)
As of 2022-08-09 01:21 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found