Dave Thanks for the response, and sample code I found from your 10/13/2003 post. Sounds like you would have no reservations about doing this is ObjectScript.
Skip On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:10:56 -0400, David Yerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Skip Hill wrote: > ><Snip> >> >> 1. Is it reasonable to expect that I can develop a reliable, effective and >> efficient TCP/IP socket communications driver written in ObjectScript and >> running as a job on the Cache server. > >Well, InterSystems did with HTTP, FTP, and mail. > >I actually got a (very simple proof of concept only!) working SNMP >manager going last week. >As long as the protocol is at least byte(octet)-oriented, and you aren't >using Unicode, you can get around a lot of the bit manipulation stuff >using integer math and $C functions and the _ string concatenation >operator on the sending side, and $E and $A on the receiving side. > >> 2. Or does it get complicated and cumbersome, requiring system boots to clear up >> problems with failed connections, timeouts, etc. > >We have a low-volume application here using it for many months, I've had >no problems. > >> 3. What kinds of caveats or warnings might be appropriate to consider. For >> instance, maybe stopping/starting/monitoring these jobs is problematic, or for >> some reason they create unexpected resource demands, or it's fine with only one >> fixed client connecting to a socket, but it gets complicated with numerous >> multiple clients, or perhaps the packet mode works great but not the stream >> mode. > >Well, my application wasn't job-oriented, was more the open a socket, >toss some bytes down the wire, wait for a fixed-length response string, >close the socket sort of thing. > >> 4. Is anyone aware of a "how to do it" sample that I might glean some direction >> from. > >Sure, go to the ng archive at http://www.xiscsp.co.uk/ngp (thanks Peter) >and "Search Bodies" for "socketnumber" (without the quotes), second >item in thread. (Don't feel bad, I had a hard time finding it myself) > >Hope that'll get you started, anyway. > >Dave
