I am working on a project in SAS EG (7.1) which involves process dependence and parallel execution, as depicted below:
I have the following questions:
Is there a way to retrieve or set relations (i.e. process_C --> program_D) between the processes programmatically? The maintenance is becoming problematic with complex projects. Ideally, I would like to be able to re-create the links between processes from external table.
I start the whole process with the option “Run branch from <>” process. Let’s assume that we have only 2 processors available. Is there a way to set the order of execution between process_A, B, C? The critical path of the whole flow is “begin -> process_C -> process_D -> end” hence we would like it to start with process_C in order to ensure minimum execution time.
Thank you in advance.
For 1, I think the answer is "no", if you mean a well defined SAS programmatic method. At least for the relatively limited information and example you provide above, anyway. More might be possible with metadata server - not my area of expertise.
You can do some of this at least using scripting via Powershell or VBScript. EG's API is fairly wide open and not all that hard to use. I won't suggest how as my understanding of this is limited also, but it seems like it should be possible to do what you suggest, though probably not easy.
For your second point:
First off, EG typically runs "top to bottom" if it has no other information on how to process a particular choice. So put c->d above a/b to get it processed first.
Second, you could use conditional processing perhaps. There should be a macro variable that tells you how many cpus you have (&SYSNCPU on my machine, hopefully same on other versions). You could use that value to conditionally link to A then B as opposed to A+B simultaneously. I'm not sure how easy this would be to do in a flexible fashion, though.
Related
Are there any tried/true methods of managing your own sequential integer field w/o using SQL Server's built in Identity Specification? I'm thinking this has to have been done many times over and my google skills are just failing me tonight.
My first thought is to use a separate table to manage the IDs and use a trigger on the target table to manage setting the ID. Concurrency issues are obviously important, but insert performance is not critical in this case.
And here are some gotchas I know I need to look out for:
Need to make sure the same ID isn't doled out more than once when
multiple processes run simultaneously.
Need to make sure any solution to 1) doesn't cause deadlocks
Need to make sure the trigger works properly when multiple records are
inserted in a single statement; not only for one record at a time.
Need to make sure the trigger only sets the ID when it is not already
specified.
The reason for the last bullet point (and the whole reason I want to do this without an Identity Specification field in the first place) is because I want to seed multiple environments at different starting points and I want to be able to copy data between each of them so that the ID for a given record remains the same between environments (and I have to use integers; I cannot use GUIDs).
(Also yes, I could set identity insert on/off to copy data and still use a regular Identity Specification field but then it reseeds it after every insert. I could then use DBCC CHECKIDENT to reseed it back to where it was, but I feel the risk with this solution is too great. It only takes one time for someone to make a mistake and then when we realize it, it would be a real pain to repair the data... probably enough pain that it would have made more sense just to do what I'm doing now in the first place).
SQL Server 2012 introduced the concept of a SEQUENCE database object - something like an "identity" column, but separate from a table.
You can create and use sequence from your code, you can use the values in various place, and more.
See these links for more information:
Sequence numbers (MS Docs)
CREATE SEQUENCE statement (MS Docs)
SQL Server SEQUENCE basics (Red Gate - Joe Celko)
I have just started with Spark and was struggling with the concept of tasks.
Can any one please help me in understanding when does an action (say reduce) not run in the driver program.
From the spark tutorial,
"Aggregate the elements of the dataset using a function func (which
takes two arguments and returns one). The function should be
commutative and associative so that it can be computed correctly in
parallel. "
I'm currently experimenting with an application which reads a directory on 'n' files and counts the number of words.
From the web UI the number of tasks is equal to number of files. And all the reduce functions are taking place on the driver node.
Can you please tell a scenario where the reduce function won't execute at the driver. Does a task always include "transformation+action" or only "transformation"
All the actions are performed on the cluster and results of the actions may end up on the driver (depending on the action).
Generally speaking the spark code you write around your business logic is not the program that would actually run - rather spark uses it to create a plan which will execute your code in the cluster. The plan creates a task of all the actions that can be done on a partition without the need to shuffle data around. Every time spark needs the data arranged differently (e.g. after sorting) It will create a new task and a shuffle between the first and the latter tasks
Ill take a stab at this, although I may be missing part of the question. A task is indeed always transformation(s) and an action. The transformation's are lazy and would not submit anything, thus the need for an action. You can always call .toDebugString on your RDD to see where each job split will be; each level of indentation is a new stage. I think the reduce function showing on the driver is a bit of a misnomer as it will run first in parallel and then merge the results. So, I would expect that the task does indeed run on the workers as far as it can.
I am working on a multinational project where target audience for logs might be from two nationalities. Therefore it is becoming important to log in more than one language , I am thinking about writing to 2 different log folders based on language every time I am logging something, but I am also wondering if there's some out of the box functionality that is coming along with logging frameworks like log4cpp?
As other commenters have mentioned, it sounds like you are going down the wrong track by looking to do multilingual logging.
My recommendation would be to use English (which is the standard for technical information, and which I guess is the language you know best) and to make sure that the language you use is clear, grammatically correct and unambiguous. Then if one of the technicians cannot understand it, they can very easily and efficiently run it through a machine translation engine such as Google Translate. Or indeed they could process the logs and run everything through Google Translate to append translated text, particularly if you annotate the logs to mark the language content.
Assuming that the input language is well-written, machine transation usually gives a good result which the end user can understand. If the message isn't clear, has typos or abbreviations, then that's where machine translation fails spectacularly.
Writing log naturally brings down the speed of execution due to file open, seek and write operations involved as part of it.
This is one primary reason why many developer and architects suggest to write log at different levels.Increasing the depth of log entries as level increases to trace down the problems better. At higher level, you will notice that your process speed drops due to more log entries getting generated.
Rather suggest you to use services that can translate from one language to other.
I'm sure there are libraries free or paid which does this translation. You can create a small utility program that runs in the background and does this conversion during process idle time.
Well one suggestion is you can use a different process/thread which listens for your log messages, which you can log it from there ..
This reduces I/O logging time in your main process/thread and you can make all changes related to Logging language over there..
For multi - Lingual support I think you can try writing with widechar string .. though I am not sure..
the best approaches for logging localization using c++
Install Qt 4 and use QObject::tr/ tr() macro for strings. Write strings in whatever language you want. Hire/Get a translator to localize strings using QT Linguist.
Please note that perfect translation is impossible, so there will be many "amusing" misunderstandings, even if your translator is a genius. So it might be a better idea to select main language for programming team.
--EDIT--
Didn't notice this part before:
in more than one language
One way to approach it is to implement log reader. Instead of writing plaintext messages, you could dump message ids (generated by some kind of macros) and string arguments if strings are formatted. "Log reader" will allow user to select desired language while viewing log file, and translate messages based on their ids/arguments using mechanism similar to QTranslator. The good thing about this approach is that you'll be able to add more languages later - so it'll be possible to retranslate old logs. The bad thing is that this format will be harder to read for "normal human", although you can add plaintext messages in addition to message ids and arguments and you'll need to write log viewer.
Qt 4 has most of this framework implemented (there are routines for dumping variants into text/data streams, and so on) along with translation tool. See QTranslator documentation and Linguist manual for more info.
I have a server program that I am writing. In this program, I log allot. Is it customary in logging (for a server) to overwrite the log of previous runs, append to the file with some sort of new run header, or to create a new log file (it won't be restarted too often).
Which of these solutions is the way of doing things under Linux/Unix/MacOS?
Also, can anyone suggest a logging library for C++/C? I need one, regardless of the answer to the above question.
Take a look in /var/log/...you'll see that files are structured like
serverlog
serverlog.1
serverlog.2
This is done by logrotate which is called in a cronjob. But everything is simply in chronological order within the files. So you should just append to the same log file each time, and let logrotate split it up if needed.
You can also add a configuration file to /etc/logrotate.d/ to control how a particular log is rotated. Depending on how big your logfiles are, it might be a good idea to add here information about your logging. You can take a look at other files in this directory to see the syntax.
This is a rather complex issue. I don't think that there is a silver bullet that will kill all your concerns in one go.
The first step in deciding what policy to follow would be to set your requirements. Why is each entry logged? What is its purpose? In most cases this will result in some rather concrete facts, such as:
You need to be able to compare the current log with past logs. Even when an error message is self-evident, the process that led to it can be determined much faster by playing spot-the-difference, rather than puzzling through the server execution flow diagram - or, worse, its source code. This means that you need at least one log from a past run - overwriting blindly is a definite No.
You need to be able to find and parse the logs without going out of your way. That means using whatever facilities and policies are already established. On Linux it would mean using the syslog facility for important messages, to allow them to appear in the usual places.
There is also some good advice to heed:
Time is important. No only because there's never enough of it, but also because log files without proper timestamps for each entry are practically useless. Make sure that each entry has a timestamp - most system-wide logging facilities will do that for you. Make also sure that the clocks on all your computers are as accurate as possible - using NTP is a good way to do that.
Log entries should be as self-contained as possible, with minimal cruft. You don't need to have a special header with colors, bells and whistles to announce that your server is starting - a simple MyServer (PID=XXX) starting at port YYYYY would be enough for grep (or the search function of any decent log viewer) to find.
You need to determine the granularity of each logging channel. Sending several GB of debugging log data to the system logging daemon is not a good idea. A good approach might be to use separate log files for each logging level and facility, so that e.g. user activity is not mixed up with low-level data that in only useful when debugging the code.
Make sure your log files are in one place, preferably separated from other applications. A directory with the name of your application is a good start.
Stay within the norm. Sure you may have devised a new nifty logfile naming scheme, but if it breaks the conventions in your system it could easily confuse even the most experienced operators. Most people will have to look through your more detailed logs in a critical situation - don't make it harder for them.
Use the system log handling facilities. E.g. on Linux that would mean appending to the same file and letting an external daemon like logrotate to handle the log files. Not only would it be less work for you, it would also automatically maintain any general logging policies as a whole.
Finally: Always copy log important data to the system log as well. Operators watch the system logs. Please, please, please don't make them have to look at other places, just to find out that your application is about to launch the ICBMs...
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/696321/best-logging-framework-for-native-c
For the logging, I would suggest creating a new log file and clean it using a certain frequency to avoid it growing too fat. Overwrite logs of previous login is usually a bad idea.
I'm looking for a good efficient method for scanning a directory structure for changed files in Windows XP+. Something like how git does it is exactly what I'm looking for, when running a git status it displays all modified files, all new (untracked) files and deleted files very quickly which is exactly what I would like to do.
I have a basic model up and running which performs an initial scan and stores all filenames, size, dates and attributes.
On a subsequent scan it checks if the size, attributes or date have changed and marks as a changed file.
My issue now comes in detecting moved and deleted files. Is there a tried and tested method for this sort of thing? I'm struggling to come up with a good method.
I should mention that it will eventually use ReadDirectoryChangesW to monitor files and alert the user when something changes so a full scan is really a last resort after the initial scan.
Thanks,
J
EDIT: I think I may have described the problem badly. The issue I'm facing is not so much detecting the changes - I have ReadDirectoryChangesW() using IOCP on multiple threads to detected when a change happens, the issue is more what to do with the information. For example, a moved file is reported as a delete followed by a create and a rename comes in 2 parts, old name, followed by new name. So what I'm asking is how to differentiate between the delete as part of a move and an actual delete. I'm guessing buffering the changes and processing batches would be an option but feels messy.
In native code FileSystemWatcher is replaced by ReadDirectoryChangesW. Using this properly is not simple, there is a good baseline to build off here.
I have used this code in a previous job and it worked pretty well. The Win32 API itself (and FileSystemWatcher) are prone to problems that are described in the docs and also discussed in various places online, but impact of those will depending on your use cases.
EDIT: the exact change is indicated in the FILE_NOTIFY_INFORMATION structure that you get back - adds, removals, rename data including old and new name.
I voted Liviu M. up. However, another option if you don't want to use the .NET framework for some reason, would be to use the basic Win32 API call FindFirstChangeNotification.
You can use USN journaling if you are up to it, that is pretty low level (NTFS level) stuff.
Here you can find detailed information and source code included. It is written in C# but most of it is PInvoking C/C++ functions.