>> >SHM: >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_memory >> >E.g. Apache and Tomcat use that. >> >> If one of the processes crashes is there a chance to lose information? > >There is always chance to lose information. That is reason why we use >database with journal.
I mean if Apache crashes the valuable data which will be stored in shared memory will be lost and stored into RAM until system reboot. How do you deal with this problem? As far as know in shared memory communication method if one of the daemons crashes the data will be lost and there will be memory leak. >> Have you done any benchmark tests? >Yes. would you share some information how much calls with share memory can be done per second and how much client servers can spacewalk handle. >> >Sockets with plain text: >> >E.g. monitoring programs open sockets and write plain text there while >> >other monitoring program reads those data. >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_text >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_socket >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_domain_socket >> > >> >> Why you don't use SHM everywhere? >Because SHM requires both programs to share the same memory. e.g be on >the same machine, which is not always true in Spacewalk > >> Isn't this a reliable way to transfer information between processes? > >All protocols we use are reliable ways to transfer information between >processes. > > >-- >Miroslav Suchy >Red Hat Satellite Engineering
_______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
