Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW

Re: Proposal how to make modules using fork more portable

by sundialsvc4 (Abbot)
on Mar 30, 2011 at 18:14 UTC ( #896493=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Proposal how to make modules using fork more portable

I am always of the opinion that threads and processes should terminate themselves, and that they should, where possible, “stick around, waiting for more work to do,” instead of coming into existence to service one request and then flaming-out.

The kill(9) protocol is definitely one that was “taken from Unix,” and it really does not have a good parallel in the Windows (i.e. DEC VAX 11/780...) world-view.   And yet, I have never recommended “management by the use of overwhelming deadly-force”   ;-)   anywhere.

Building process contexts, and tearing them down, are best thought of as expensive operations.   And, the maximum number of processes that may exist at one time is usually something that you want to govern.

  • Comment on Re: Proposal how to make modules using fork more portable

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://896493]
[shmem]: looks like a 302 loop - "The document has moved here"
[Discipulus]: ..but only http not https
[shmem]: hmm after some looping I get it via http
[choroba]: After submitting the form, I'm getting "Sorry, we're really busy right now, please wait for a bit. This page will automagically refresh soon"
[hippo]: Still nothing via https
marto pictures someone trying to fix a problem, while the page gets battered by F5s :P

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (11)
As of 2018-02-20 11:59 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    When it is dark outside I am happiest to see ...

    Results (271 votes). Check out past polls.