Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change

Re: Re: Re: Re: Log parsing by timestamp dilema

by Limbic~Region (Chancellor)
on Feb 01, 2003 at 20:51 UTC ( #231890=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Re: Re: Log parsing by timestamp dilema
in thread Log parsing by timestamp dilema

My logical interpretation of adrianh's solution was pretty much correct - I just couldn't see it in the code. This works as is, but I am going to test its speed against tall_man's suggestion as it runs considerably slower. I know that it is doing a lot more work, so this is expected and with the $|++ - the humans viewing it shouldn't really notice a difference. None the less, I am going to code my own version of the logic to see if I can't speed it up in addition to benching it against a version using File::MergeSort. If I can't do any better than your integration of adrianh's solution, the only change I will make is having it being an option and not the default. This way it will not effect the overall speed if someone chooses to do a -c and only look at one connector log.

Cheers - L~R

  • Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: Log parsing by timestamp dilema

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Log parsing by timestamp dilema
by DaveH (Monk) on Feb 02, 2003 at 00:04 UTC

    I'd be interested to see what you come up with. :-) That was definitely a "quick" hack of your original code, so there was definitely room for improvement.

    Glad it helped.


    -- Dave :-)


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://231890]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others surveying the Monastery: (3)
As of 2023-06-10 07:58 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How often do you go to conferences?

    Results (37 votes). Check out past polls.