On 07/04/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7 Apr 2007, at 10:37, Fergal Daly wrote:
> Exactly. And it's clear that you can interleave these 2 streams
> without ambiguity.
>
> If you want to do chunking then you're going to have carefully buffer
> your output on all streams and even then you can have trouble with
> chunks that are larger than some OS buffer size.
I suspect we're talking at cross purposes here. What do you think is
valuable about being able to multiplex TAP from multiple sources into
a single stream in real time? Why wouldn't you just use multiple
streams?
If you're testing web applications, you can fire off forks or threads.
So instead of serially waiting for each network operation to complete,
let them run in parallel. This could help to get wallclock-time closer
to cpu-time. You could put each set of tests in it's own script (might
be easy, might not), fire off each script outputting to it's own file
and then run the tap consumer over each file in turn and join all the
results up. Or you could just give each thread/process it's own test
prefix and let them off to do their own thing.
This doesn't seem to be motivation of the original poster was asking
about, however joining multiple streams becomes easy, you just prefix
each line with "$n." where $n is the number of the file.
Using BEGIN/END works for the non-real time however it seems like it
would be better to use a solution that works equally well in either
situation,
F
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
