Hi Steve, | Xavier Leroy showed me how to set things up so that an OCaml computation | is interrupted after a pre-set time limit to ask the user how long to | continue. Now I'd like to do the same thing for two parallel | computations that I'd like to have share the time available more-or-less | evenly. (I'm writing OCaml code for automatically proving results in the | HOL Light theorem prover, and I have a situation where the code needs to | prove that a value is positive or prove that its negative, but the code | doesnt know which, if either, it will be able to prove.) How about setting up some kind of iterative deepening and interleaving the computations, rather than aiming for true parallelism? Assuming that you can already run a computation with a timeout based on Xavier's earlier code, you could do: Computation A for 1 time unit Computation B for 1 time unit Computation A for 2 time units Computation B for 2 time units Computation A for 4 time units Computation B for 4 time units Computation A for 8 time units ... restarting the computations of A and B from scratch each time, until one succeeds. The repetition of work gives a performance hit but it's easy to bound it by a moderate constant factor, depending on how fast you grow the timeslices. The common preference for depth-first search with iterative deepening over breadth-first search in many AI/search applications is based on the same philosophy: the moderate increase in overall runtime from duplicated work can be more than compensated for by the fact that you don't need to store intermediate state to remember where you've been. Indeed, many of HOL Light's automated proving routines like MESON_TAC and REAL_SOS (is the latter what you're using to prove positivity and negativity?) already do some kind of iterative deepening, searching step by step with successively larger bounds on the search space. It wouldn't be hard to decouple the outer loop and interleave the steps, e.g. Step 1 of computation A Step 1 of computation B Step 2 of computation A Step 2 of computation B Step 3 of computation A ... This may be more coarse-grained than what you wanted, but it's better than nothing, and it doesn't need any timeouts or threading. John.