Kevin Koch wrote: > Thanks for that suggestion. I don't believe the local RPC mechanism uses > TCP or UDP so are I/O completion ports applicable? I'm sorry I haven't had time to provide a detailed response to your question. The choice of which RPC mechanism is used is up to you. Either TCP or Named Pipes can be used instead of local rpc if you want to establish a connection between the two processes that can provide for endpoint connectivity detection. Both of these methods are frowned upon because they require the allocation of additional kernel resources.
Another approach that is much lower cost would be to use the client to server connection to communicate the name of a global object that is allocated by the client. The client can lock the object and the server can add the object to a list of objects it waits on (or tests at the beginning of each incoming request.) If the client dies, the server will be able to lock the object or will detect that the object is no longer present. This approach takes advantage of the shared resources of the local system and does not require the use of heavy weight RPC mechanisms. Jeffrey Altman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ kfwdev mailing list kfwdev@mit.edu http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kfwdev
