Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Interpreter eval counter out of bounds

by andreas1234567 (Vicar)
on Jan 28, 2011 at 13:52 UTC ( #884809=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Interpreter eval counter out of bounds
in thread Interpreter eval counter out of bounds

Do you have the ability to log the evals it's executing, in order to see whether the eval compile warnings/errors make any sense?
In theory yes, but I assume impact on performance would be unacceptable as well as the log files themselves would be difficult to manage (log rotation would happen too quickly). I have not been able to reproduce the problem outside of a specific production environment with certain difficult-to-change log requirements.
--
No matter how great and destructive your problems may seem now, remember, you've probably only seen the tip of them. [1]


Comment on Re^2: Interpreter eval counter out of bounds
Re^3: Interpreter eval counter out of bounds
by flexvault (Parson) on Jan 28, 2011 at 14:16 UTC

    I have a perl daemon that in principle (unless stopped or restarted) will run forever. . .

    All of our production scripts restart themselves after some time is passed, ( i.e. 4-hours, 24-hours, etc. ).

    If you have 'cron' you might want to restart the process periodically. If you can't use 'cron' then the script can test on how much time has passed and use 'system' to restart itself and then exit.

    Your script will be happy with a fresh start.

    "Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin

      use 'system' to restart itself and then exit.

      Your script will be happy with a fresh start.

      Except that when using system, the old process doesn't go away; it'll wait for the new one to finish.

      Daemons restarting itself is a classical trick. But you got to use exec, not system. You want to replace yourself with the new instance, not create an additional one.

        JavaFan,

        You are correct, but we do use 'system', however, the command that we issue has a " \&" at the end, so in our Unix environment, we're okay.

        I just checked the code on one of the scripts, and realized that I forgot how it was implemented. 'exec' would have been better.

        Thank you

        "Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://884809]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-12-20 00:52 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (94 votes), past polls