RE: Matlab equivalents needed (yes very original)

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Mon, 6/28/10, Michael V <address@hidden> wrote:

From: Michael V <address@hidden>
Subject: RE: Matlab equivalents needed (yes very original)
To: address@hidden, address@hidden
Date: Monday, June 28, 2010, 5:26 PM




So are any of these cluster-safe? If I have say 160 CPUs running 160 processes 
(1 per CPU) and 
all processes write to same directory on same hard drive, is there a chance of 
conflict?
Also, is there an implementation of these for Matlab? I do not want to maintain 
two codebases.

Thanks,

Michael


Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:38:55 -0500
Subject: Re: FW: Matlab equivalents needed (yes very original)
From: address@hidden
To: address@hidden


For (2) do any of these solve the issue?

tmpnam
tmpfile
mkstemp


                                          
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with 
Hotmail.  Get busy. 

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


Something like <hostname>.<PID> is sufficient for a unique ID - because hosts 
have unique name in a cluster, and PID is unique in a host.

Maybe  <hostname>.<PID>.<current_time_since_the_epoch> .

Regards,
  Sergei.