tis 2010-02-23 klockan 15:52 +0100 skrev Kinkie:
> This bug http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10354
> shows that in glibc many cases posix_spawn() is exactly a wrapper for
> (v)fork/exec .
> So it is no worse than fork/exec, may be as good as vfork/exec
> depending on the conditi
2010/2/23 Henrik Nordström :
> mån 2010-02-22 klockan 10:20 +0100 skrev Kinkie:
>
>> Unfortunately it's implementation-dependent. For all we know
>> posix_spawn may be a library convenience wrapper around fork/exec..
>> (vfork if we're lucky).
>
> Well, it's been around for quite some time now.
>
>
mån 2010-02-22 klockan 10:20 +0100 skrev Kinkie:
> Unfortunately it's implementation-dependent. For all we know
> posix_spawn may be a library convenience wrapper around fork/exec..
> (vfork if we're lucky).
Well, it's been around for quite some time now.
If we want to argue about oldish systems
> But I guess all of this can be encapsulated so it doesn't matter.
> windows already have a native spawn function if I remember right.
Yes. AFAIK that's actually the preferred way of starting a process on
MsWin. Fork+exec in one go.
> also, the above could also be achieved using posix_spawn() on
On 02/21/2010 05:44 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 22:27 +0100, Henrik Nordström wrote:
>> lör 2010-02-20 klockan 18:25 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>>
>>> The reasons you mention seem like a good justification for this option
>>> official existence. I do not quite get the "fork bo
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 02:03 +0100, Henrik Nordström wrote:
> mån 2010-02-22 klockan 11:44 +1100 skrev Robert Collins:
>
> > command protocol for it would be pretty similar to the SHM disk IO
> > helper, but for processes. Something like:
> > squid->helper: spawn stderrfd argv(escaped/encoded to be
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 02:03:31 +0100, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> mån 2010-02-22 klockan 11:44 +1100 skrev Robert Collins:
>
>> command protocol for it would be pretty similar to the SHM disk IO
>> helper, but for processes. Something like:
>> squid->helper: spawn stderrfd argv(escaped/encoded to be
mån 2010-02-22 klockan 11:44 +1100 skrev Robert Collins:
> command protocol for it would be pretty similar to the SHM disk IO
> helper, but for processes. Something like:
> squid->helper: spawn stderrfd argv(escaped/encoded to be line & NULLZ
>string safe)
> helper->squid: pid, std
On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 22:27 +0100, Henrik Nordström wrote:
> lör 2010-02-20 klockan 18:25 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
> > The reasons you mention seem like a good justification for this option
> > official existence. I do not quite get the "fork bomb" analogy because
> > we are not creating more
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:27:06 +0100, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> lör 2010-02-20 klockan 18:25 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
>> The reasons you mention seem like a good justification for this option
>> official existence. I do not quite get the "fork bomb" analogy because
>> we are not creating more t
lör 2010-02-20 klockan 18:25 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
> The reasons you mention seem like a good justification for this option
> official existence. I do not quite get the "fork bomb" analogy because
> we are not creating more than a configured number of concurrent forks,
> are we? We may create
lör 2010-02-20 klockan 17:12 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> It has been found necessary in certain corner cases with PHP helpers
> (which have system imposed limited lifetimes) where a proxy has
> previously been under some load and helpers started then are timed out
> later under low load as a b
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Alex Rousskov
wrote:
> When Squid dies due to frequent helper failures so do helpers. Thus,
> strictly speaking, a current helper is not a true "phoenix". Also, the
> option is applied to the helper, so it should focus on what happens to
> the helper and not Squid
On 02/20/2010 02:30 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Alex Rousskov wrote:
>> On 02/19/2010 09:12 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> This patch adds an advanced option to the Squid helper controls which
>>> overrides Squid dying when helpers crash.
>>>
>>> It has been found necessary in certain corner cases wit
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Alex Rousskov wrote:
[...]
> The dynamic helpers are already phoenix. This is about making Squid itself
> immortal to the flames as they regenerate.
>
> I've left the doc out for now since I'm not sure I really want this to be
> widely used
Alex Rousskov wrote:
On 02/19/2010 09:12 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
This patch adds an advanced option to the Squid helper controls which
overrides Squid dying when helpers crash.
It has been found necessary in certain corner cases with PHP helpers
(which have system imposed limited lifetimes) wh
gah! Forgot to hit reply-all
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kinkie
Date: Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] immortal helpers
To: Amos Jeffries
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> This patch adds an advanced option to the Squid hel
On 02/19/2010 09:12 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> This patch adds an advanced option to the Squid helper controls which
> overrides Squid dying when helpers crash.
>
> It has been found necessary in certain corner cases with PHP helpers
> (which have system imposed limited lifetimes) where a proxy ha
This patch adds an advanced option to the Squid helper controls which
overrides Squid dying when helpers crash.
It has been found necessary in certain corner cases with PHP helpers
(which have system imposed limited lifetimes) where a proxy has
previously been under some load and helpers start
19 matches
Mail list logo
