Dalai wrote: 2022-10-07, 20:10 UTCI don't understand your conclusion.
After you have rejected your own words
Dalai wrote: 2022-10-07, 13:42 UTCAffinity can only limit the cores/threads available to a process, but it can't add anything.
>>>
Dalai wrote: 2022-10-07, 20:10 UTCthe number of cores/threads a process runs on can be increased again.
, this conclusion has ceased to be relevant.
Dalai wrote: 2022-10-07, 20:10 UTCIt's just a different way to assign process affinities. The tool can't do more than the OS allows.
You're confusing again. One more time. I didn't ask for any other way to set affinity, I asked for a program to get information about the distribution of the process load on the cores/threads.
2Fla$her
If you think my statements are contradictory, I suggest you read my posts again, maybe even read further into the topic via other (re)sources. Do your own testing in Windows Task Manager (or any other tool which can set process affinities), then think about what you see and come to your own conclusion. Maybe you'll see that my statements are not contradictory at all. That's all I have to say about this topic.
Fla$her wrote: 2022-10-07, 22:08 UTC
I didn't ask for any other way to set affinity, I asked for a program to get information about the distribution of the process load on the cores/threads.
I don't know any such program but that doesn't mean there isn't any. It would have to be pretty low level though. But now we're completely off topic, which is why this is my last post regarding this tangent discussion.
Regards
Dalai
#101164 Personal licence
Ryzen 5 2600, 16 GiB RAM, ASUS Prime X370-A, Win7 x64
Dalai wrote: 2022-10-07, 22:53 UTCIf you think my statements are contradictory, I suggest you read my posts again
This won't help, because I already had to reread them carefully to find something in them besides what was already stated in the previous answers, which I didn't need at all.
The problem is not that I do not understand what you are writing, the problem is that you are moving away from the context in which I am writing.
Fla$her wrote: 2022-10-07, 22:08 UTCI don't know any such program but that doesn't mean there isn't any.
It was worth stopping at this fact right away, the rest is an empty polemic. Thanks for participating.
Thanks to everyone so much for all the info. All educational for me. I understand what both nsp and Mr. Ghisler were saying too. On github, I was able to verify that the current C implementation of Blake3 isn't multithreaded, but the Rust version is. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone fixes that! Sounds like Mr. Ghisler will include the multithreaded version whenever it becomes available. I'll keep an eye out for it. Thanks again!
I looked at it, but I don't have any Rust experience either. Also, I was wondering... for some reason, I had it in my head that Total Commander was written in Delphi. Was that an earlier incarnation, or maybe I'm thinking of some other utility I use?
Anyhow, hopefully there are some excellent Rust devs among the Total Commander user base who can help us convert the crate (or whatever the proper parlance is) to a DLL! Many thanks for looking into it!
Yes, TC is written mostly in Delphi because it is very easy to make a user interface and custom controls with it. Many of the dlls and plugins (also most of my own) are in C/C++ though, because there is a lot of sample code and libraries which can be used freely (no GPL code, LGPL and other licenses like Apache are OK). Delphi can be used to call and to create dlls just fine.