I'm sorry, I just read that I was right in the pdf that was sent. I should only attach it in the child when dealing with name shared memory.
On 5/28/07, César Leonardo Blum Silveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do I really have to attach the segment on child processes? I thought that if it was anonymous shm, then eveything would be inherited by the child processes. Thank you all for your responses :) -- César L. B. Silveira http://cesarbs.wordpress.com/ On 5/25/07, David Wortham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > César, > I would think the most important part of timing when you create the shm > is that you time it so all of the child processes can attach to it. That > means that at least the attachment calls have to be made after the parent > process has created the child processes. You can probably do the majority > of the setup while you are still in the parent process (which I assume is > running during the module config creation phase). > > One other consideration you might have to take into account: if Apache > starts up as root then switches to a less-priveleged user, the other user > would still have to have access to the path and file of the shm (assuming > it's not an anonymous shm) then you would run into problems creating the shm > then trying to get the children to read/write it. > > Dave > > > > On 5/25/07, César Leonardo Blum Silveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > Is there any problem if I try to create a shared memory segment in the > > module config creation phase, instead of the post config phase? > > > > Thank you, > > > > -- > > César L. B. Silveira > > http://cesarbs.wordpress.com/ > > >
-- César L. B. Silveira http://cesarbs.wordpress.com/
