comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » maximum LUN
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: maximum LUN [message #64006 is a reply to message #63928] Mon, 24 November 2008 19:46 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Jeremy Bailin is currently offline  Jeremy Bailin
Messages: 618
Registered: April 2008
Senior Member
On Nov 24, 1:30 pm, Reimar Bauer <R.Ba...@fz-juelich.de> wrote:
> greg.a...@googlemail.com schrieb:
>
>
>
>>> What reason could there possibly be for having hundreds
>>> of files open simultaneously? The only thing that comes
>>> immediately to mind for me is a poor programming concept. :-)
>
>> I kind of expected that reply... :) I think I do have a valid
>> application, though. I have an archive of a few thousand satellite
>> images, each of which has 6 bands, stored in separate files. I've made
>> an object which can handle the six bands and return a subset image for
>> a selected region processed as I want it. It also returns the image's
>> coverage of the region, so that I can fill in any gaps with data from
>> other images. This I do by opening further image objects. So far, I
>> can use four of these to make an on-the-fly mosaic before I run out of
>> LUNs - and it works well up to that point. The program allows zooming
>> and panning, so I need repeat access to similar regions of the same
>> files. I think it would be too slow to close and reopen them every
>> time, so the objects hold the files open. The archive is several
>> terabytes, changing, and not in my control - so preprocessing is out.
>> With 128 LUNs instead of 28 I could mosaic about 20 image subsets,
>> which will be enough for the moment. Still, if the number 128 was just
>> an arbitrary choice long ago, I'd like to ask early for a bigger one!
>
>> cheers,
>> Greg
>
> close and open costs nothing. The code between both lines can be
> efficient or not.
>
> cheers
> Reimar

Not exactly "nothing", but about 0.2 ms for me:

IDL> s1=systime(/sec) & openr,1,'foo' & close,1 & s2=systime(/sec) &
print, s2-s1
0.00021815300
IDL> s3=systime(/sec) & s4=systime(/sec) & print, s4-s3
6.9141388e-06

-Jeremy.
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: simple .sav doesn't work
Next Topic: byte/unicode mismatch

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 03:15:30 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.40014 seconds