parallalization and taskset

[Marcofras]

is it possible have parallalization with taskset?

[Hu]

Why are you using taskset at all? If you want four instances, run four instances:

[Marcofras]

With your method i have no guarante its parallelized in different core with taskset instead i have guarante. Or not?

[Hu]

With taskset, you guarantee that each task either runs on the specified core or, if that core is not available, does not run at all. Without taskset, you let the scheduler pick which core to run each one on, and it will try to run as many things in parallel as you have cores available. Why do you think you need to force particular core assignments for particular processes?

[Marcofras]

Are you sure that its sufficient & for have parallalization?
I read somewhere that its not sure this

[Hu]

& tells the shell to place the command in the background. Where did you read that this would not work? Have you tried the command I gave you? What went wrong?

[Marcofras]

Im under c++ and that command no works, i use a series of system(./desc &) or something similar is it correct? Will it works?

[Hu]

If you are using system from C++, why is your opening post expressed as shell? Rather than asking if something will work after I told you it will, why not try it and report whether it works?

I think you should provide a Minimum Reproducible Example demonstrating your problem.

[Marcofras]

Indeed i was wrong im tryng in shell before c++, dont you think its the same? I dont make c++ code yet, do you think system(./desc &) will work and save time with parallelization i wish?

[Hu]

I gave you a loop that should work. I later reiterated that I expect it to work. Yes, system should work fine, since, according to its manual page, that is delegating back to the shell, which is almost always the wrong thing to do in a C++ program. If you need further help, please demonstrate a specific problem.

[Marcofras]

I will make the code c++ in days.
Why its wrong thing which is the correct form? Maybe thread or something similar?

[GDH-gentoo]

Because a C++ program can do things like spawning processes by using the libc directly (or through some convenience library) instead of invoking the shell.
_________________

[szatox]

Marcofras, you're bouncing around too much. Pause for a minute and focus.
What are you _actually_ trying to do?
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again

[Marcofras]

parallalization, because i had no success with thread (in the past) im opting to divide the program in several subprograms and run parallelized, it seems more easy.

[szatox]

Eh... This is clearly a case of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem.
Regarding your original question:
> is it possible have parallalization with taskset?
The only correct answer is: "Yes but no". Unfortunately, on top of being correct, it is also completely useless.

Parallelization where? Why did you start with shell and then you're suddenly going to cpp? This part is confusing.
More importantly: What is the thing you're trying to write there? What is the problem you're trying to solve? What is standing in your way?

> I think you should provide a Minimum Reproducible Example demonstrating your problem.
Yeah, I second that. Although this technique is primarily used for reporting bugs, it does help with communication in general.
Overkill is still a kill.
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again

[Hu]

Yes, a Minimum Reproducible Example might be overkill here. I asked for it because OP's questions implied to me that he had directly experienced shell background not to exhibit the desired parallelism that I had stated would work. If he was experiencing that lack, we could try to understand why. If he has not tried the solutions given to him, I would like for him to do so or explain why not (particularly since this should be easy to test, due to being independent of the content of ./desc), before we put more work into assuring him again that his doubts are misplaced.