search for: srapply

...https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/bioc-devel/2013-May/004355.html and nowhere else. It probably should be documented in ShortRead. Possibly this has already changed for I am using still R 3.1.0. I thought I'd check. Oh, and, in my hands/hardware, the value of this FastqStreamer's use of srapply's parallelization is negligible, at least if the consumer of successive yields is in the main process. I see that the new bpiterate appears to take advantage of yielding in forked processes, which sounds promising. Is that the idea? Looking forward.... Malcolm Cook

...4dha6f1c > > > > >>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Steve Lianoglou < >>>> mailinglist.honeypot at gmail.com**> wrote: >>>> >>>> In response to a question from yesterday, I pointed someone to the >>>>> ShortRead `srapply` function and I wondered to myself why it had to >>>>> necessarily by "burried" in the ShortRead package (aside from it >>>>> having a `sr` prefix). >>>>> >>>> >>> I don't know that srapply necessarily 'got it right...

Hello all, I upgraded my R workstation, and to my dismay, only one core appears to be used during intensive computation of a bioconductor function. What I have now is two dual-core Xeon 5160 CPUs and 10 GB RAM. When I fully load it, top reports about 25% user, 75% idle and 0.98 short-term load. The archives gave nothing helpful besides mention of snow. I thought of posting to HPC, but this system