|The stupid question is the question not asked|
Re^4: dynamic number of threads based on CPU utilizationby BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Sep 26, 2012 at 16:42 UTC||Need Help??|
.I thought that since the procXml sub worked just fine, it would not be relevant to the discussion or potential solution.
You were mostly right. The only relevance it has is that nowhere in that code do I see any sign of locking (the keyword 'lock' does not appear), which means that multiple threads are writing to a shared hash and there is nothing to prevent them from corrupting data through collisions.
You may 'get away with it', but I wouldn't want to be responsible for when things go wrong.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.