Am 20.06.2012 17:04, schrieb Ivan Pechorin:
> 2012/6/20 Christian Heimes mailto:li...@cheimes.de>>
>
> You'd have to register all file descriptors in a
> central registry, remove the FDs on close and close() the FDs after
> fork(). That's lots of work but C++ should make it easie
>
>
2012/6/20 Christian Heimes
> You'd have to register all file descriptors in a
> central registry, remove the FDs on close and close() the FDs after
> fork(). That's lots of work but C++ should make it easie
>
>
Sounds too complex: why not just close() all the FDs >= 3 after fork(),
before exec*()
Am 20.06.2012 14:43, schrieb Ian Barber:
> This is interesting - I wonder if this is somethign that would help the
> situations where people do use fork to manage their children (in PHP
> that happens a fair bit).
No, CLOEXEC doesn't help you with fork() only programs. Just fork() call
doesn't eva
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> ZMQ already has an extensive usage of file descriptors. Some may even
> they it creates FDs like crazy. Without CLOEXEC all child processes
> inherit the FDs from their parent process, therefore increasing the
> total amount of FDs in the
On Jun 19, 2012, at 7:06 AM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've done some tests with pyzmq to check if ZQM sets the CLOEXEC flag on
> its file descriptors. During the tests I ran into several issues that
> might be bugs in ZMQ or pyzmq.
>
> My setup
> OS: Ubuntu 12.04 X86_64
> zmq
Hello all,
I've done some tests with pyzmq to check if ZQM sets the CLOEXEC flag on
its file descriptors. During the tests I ran into several issues that
might be bugs in ZMQ or pyzmq.
My setup
OS: Ubuntu 12.04 X86_64
zmq: 2.2.1
Python: 2.7.3 64bit
pyzmq: 2.1.11
Python, zmq and pyzqm are
