Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:14:22 +0100, Chris Green declaimed the
> following:
>
> >Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
> >>
> >> If your update frequency is low enough that it wont kill the filesystem
> >> and
> >> the amount of data is reasonably small, atomic writes to a
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
> På Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:07:23 +0100
> Chris Green skrev:
>
> > So - what's the best approach to this? I've done some searching and
> > most/many of the solutions seem rather heavyweight for my needs. Am I
> > overlooking something obvious or should I try rethinking
På Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:07:23 +0100
Chris Green skrev:
> So - what's the best approach to this? I've done some searching and
> most/many of the solutions seem rather heavyweight for my needs. Am I
> overlooking something obvious or should I try rethinking the original
> requirement and look for
On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 11:50 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> Each client would use the urllib (various names between v2
> and v3) to submit requests to the server, and process the returned
> "page".
Or the client could even be a bash script using curl, or any other HTTP
client...
--
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:07:23 +0100, Chris Green wrote:
>
> [...]
> > I want to be able to interrogate the server process from several client
> > processes, some will interrogate it multiple times, others once only.
> > They are mostly (all?) run from the command line
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:07:23 +0100, Chris Green wrote:
[...]
> I want to be able to interrogate the server process from several client
> processes, some will interrogate it multiple times, others once only.
> They are mostly (all?) run from the command line (bash).
This sounds like a good
I have a need to allow short-lived 'client' processes to interrogate a
single long-lived 'server' process on a small system (specifically a
BeagleBone Black).
The server process reads values from external hardware and this
needs to be done by a single process to ensure that it works as
intended
