See the batch command. On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, urgrue wrote: > > Could you please give us a real-life example? > > Well, for example imagine you're doing some maintenance on a server. > You want to move some big files, run updatedb by hand, run a script > that parses a bunch of files, and finally merge some video files. > > Because these are very disk-heavy operations, it's much better and > quicker if they are not run at once, but are run sequentially instead. > > So normally you'd probably use "at" to run one now, another in an hour, > etc. But this is dumb because you have to simply try and guess if the > job is done or not. You could also run them in sequence by putting them > all in the same "at" job, but its not possible to add or remove > commands from an "at" job once its created. Also, "at" is "user-aware", > ie if two users set up two at jobs they will happily run at the same > time. What I propose would add all commands to the same queue, even if > a different user is the one launching the command (but of course the > commands should be run AS the user who started it). > > So what I'm thinking is like this (lets assume the command is called > "cs" for "command spooler"): > me:~> cs > Usage: cs [add|remove|show] <command> > me:~> cs show > no entires > me:~> cs add mv /path/hugefiles /other/path/hugefiles > command added to queue > me:~> cs show > 1 [running] : mv /path/hugefiles /other/path/hugefiles > me:~> cs add updatedb > command added to queue > me:~> cs add /path/my_file_parsing_script /path/lots/of/files > command added to queue > me:~> cs add avimerge -i clip1.avi clip2.avi clip3.avi -o allclips.avi > command added to queue > me:~> cs show > 1 [running] : mv /path/hugefiles /other/path/hugefiles > 2 [queued] : updatedb > 3 [queued] : path/my_file_parsing_script /path/lots/of/files > 4 [queued] : avimerge -i clip1.avi clip2.avi clip3.avi -o allclips.avi > > > As I do lots of disk-heavy operations, I would find this INCREDIBLY > useful. > > urgrue > > > > --Adrian. > > > > On 8/2/05, urgrue <urgrue@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > i realized it would be useful to be able to add commands into a > > command > > > queue, from where they would get executed in sequence. for example > > > numerous large hard disk-intensive operations would be better > > executed > > > in sequence rather than at once. > > > in other words, exactly like a printer spool, but for commands. you > > > could add commands in, list the queue, and remove from the queue. > > > > > > does anyone know of something like this? > > > > > > > > > - > > > : send the line "unsubscribe > > linux-admin" in > > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > > > > > > > - > : send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
