[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[LDM #EQT-156607]: pqsurf bailing on ldm 6.4.2



> Thanks Steve for looking at this.
> 
> 1. I'm certainly interested in alternatives to the weather program.
> It's still being used here, both for our dept. web site's weather
> program interface, which a lot of folks around the country still cry
> about when it's down, and at least one of our synoptic faculty who still
> use it in his lab course (John Nielsen-Gammon, who assisted Neilley with
> the weather program's evolution and debugging). Though I haven't pursued
> it, I suspect scripted gempak routines could replicate most of the
> weather program's talents, and perhaps wxp could also, though I'm not
> familiar with it.

I know the guys around here use alternatives to the WEATHER program.  Unfortuna
tely, they're all at the AMS conference.  I'll forward your inquiry to them.

> Do know if wxp is being maintained by someone
> somewhere?

Sorry, I don't.

> Perhaps I should ping the gembud and weatherbud lists to see
> if anyone has replaced the weather program with gempak or wxp
> functionality.

That is probably a good idea.

> 2. I forgot what little I know about the impact of the -close option. Is
> it advisable for file I/O that may come is near-simultaneously from the
> DBFILE decodings?

Because pqact(1) performs actions sequentially, it's not possible to simultaneo
usly write into a GDBM file (at least by the same pqact(1) process, so the "-cl
ose" option will be safe.  The question is whether or not closing and reopening
 GDBM files will incurr such an overhead as to reduce performance to the point 
where the pqact(1) process can't keep up.

I'm afraid the only way to tell is to try it.

> Thanks,
> -Neil

Regards,
Steve Emmerson

Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: EQT-156607
Department: Support LDM
Priority: Normal
Status: Open