gharris999;603357 Wrote: > I think I follow that. Is there any difference, logically, between your > method of examining the whole 45 slot pipe and my method of just keeping > track of the number of minutes since last activity? I have to admit > that your method seems more elegant.
I think there is no logical difference, but I tried making things as much stateless as possible. I count "minutes" like this: "time's up: update, vote, act time's up: update, vote, act " instead of "44: update 45: act". I don't track minutes in fact, I use beats of the monitoring daemon; if the daemon is configured to run the loop every 30 seconds, the pipe gets twice as many slots when the monitor starts. I remember I wanted to use time-of-day in my early experiments. Once, the system went to sleep for external reasons, and when I woke it up, it bounced to sleep immediately because some time had elapsed during its sleep So I set for relative timing and (as possible) atomic operation. In my systems I use pipes of various lengths to monitor all sorts of activities, detect persistent hardware faults (eg over-temperature), and even to spin-down drives. It works well, and would possibly be elegant if "packed" (wouldn't the most recent activity indices matter more than the oldest, sometimes ?) -- epoch1970 Daily dose delivered by: 2 SB Classic (fw 130), 1 SB Boom (fw 50) SqueezeCenter 7.3.4 (Debian 5.0) with plugins: ContextMenu, SaverSwitcher by Peter Watkins Server Power Control by Gordon Harris WeatherTime by Martin Rehfeld IRBlaster by Gwendesign (Felix) FindArt, CDplayer by bpa BBC iPlayer, SwitchPlayer by Triode PowerSave by Jason Holtzapple TrackStat by Erland Isaksson. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ epoch1970's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16711 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=49028
_______________________________________________ unix mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
