On 1 Jun 2001, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think the only way to really solve this, is to look at how the longjmp()
> > was used in 1.3 to ensure we died correctly. I would also suggest looking
> > at how threaded dies. If the real problem is the signal handling, then I
> > would suggest that Dean was correct about signals and daemons, and we
> > should just remove all singals and use the pipe_of_death for all Unix
> > MPMs.
>
> I understand how the pipe of death works... Having to look at it all
> the time is a performance issue :)
It isn't a performance issue if it is done the way that Greg and I have
been talking about. It is only an issue if we do blocking reads.
> > Assuming that locks are interuptable is not a good idea IMHO.
>
> unclear what you mean... all supported platforms have interruptible
> locks...
Your message specifically says that pthread locks are not interruptible.
If we are using pthread cross-process locks, then they aren't
interruptible.
> do you mean "I don't want to kill a child process that is waiting for
> a mutex?"
I mean, I don't like the whole signal mechanism that we have setup. I
like the model Greg and I have outlined.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
