5 ms·
`parallel` seems redundant because it appears that `xargs -P` can accomplish the same effect, except the "-l maxload" option.
by omoikane 5y ago
`parallel` seems redundant because it appears that `xargs -P` can accomplish the same effect, except the "-l maxload" option.
- rmilk 5y agoBut that’s the point of parallel. The use case is for when you have N processors and a 10Gb NIC. Each job is CPU bound or concurrent license bound, or some jobs may take longer than others. Parallel allows you to run X jobs simultaneously to keep the CPU or licenses busy.
- JulianWasTaken 5y agoIf you mean GNU parallel, it has way way more features than xargs -P, (and a few saner defaults). See e.g. https://www.gnu.org/software/parallel/parallel_tutorial.html https://www.gnu.org/software/parallel/parallel_tutorial.html If you mean moreutils parallel, yeah I agree it's not useful.