Frederick Cheung wrote in post #986539: > On 9 Mar 2011, at 17:47, Chad Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thread.current["mycount"] = count >> count += 1 >> } >> end > > This looks thread dangerous to me - i don't think += is atomic. >> variable**. For instance, maybe whatever spawns the ruby process to >> serve httpd process could hold the variable count in its scope, and then >> the ruby processes spawned for httpd processes could then access that >> variable.
Just example code I pulled from someone online. I'd never actually use this, and my stuff would be as thread-safe as possible. > Personally, if I had to do this, I'd these objects in a separate > long-lived process (or processes) and have your controller actions talk > to these processes (exactly how depends on what you'll be doing, you > might consider drb, message queues etc) You're talking about something like a daemon to act as a proxy, and I'd communicate with it via some protocol I define? That was my thought too, but it's extra work, and I was trying to avoid spending the extra time on this and just use the FTP connection directly. So, regardless of whether this is a good or bad idea (I will assess that later), is there any way to directly access a shared resource object? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
