David Lee wrote:
> For info: During the last couple of weeks (a bit of holiday, and a couple
> of slack evenings) I've been looking (again) at "ipctest" with the
> intention of making it more thorough. In particular, it never seems to
> have been able to do more than single-client testing. There is also at
> least one bugfix (a long term variable being set up as something on the
> short-term stack) and an improvement (I think!) in which of the forked
> processes exit and which one returns.
>
> I think I've made good progress, but the changes are significant.
>
> Now I COULD simply put this into the Hg "dev" tree. But there may be
> others who would like to comment first both on principles and detail.
>
> (My gut feeling, which may be wrong, over the years is that "ipctest" is a
> forgotten corner of 'heartbeat', although I realise that it is a component
> of BSC... which is what has led me towards it over that same time.)
>
> Also, there are some further thoughts, but which might slightly alter (not
> just add to) the invocation options.
>
> If anyone has any comments on "ipctest", or ideas for it, or any
> significant interest in it, could they let me know? Thanks.
I wrote ipctest a long time ago, for some specific reason the exactly
details of which now escape me. But I think part was for verifying it
under load, but part was when it was configured using POSIX signals, in
some rare circumstances sometimes things hung.
Have you had any luck in reproducing the behavior you're looking for on
Solaris?
--
Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship... Let me
claim from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William
Wilberforce
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
