Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Upcoming time boundary events
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 08:32:47 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <101k5lf$39d9f$1@dont-email.me>
References: <100fp4v$1nmtf$1@dont-email.me> <101j008$2ob01$1@dont-email.me>
 <101j6mp$2vt8r$1@dont-email.me>
 <mn.12937e96a0bc3b12.104627@invalid.skynet.be>
 <101k1kn$96v$2@reader1.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2025 14:32:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2603df1f68bd005b514d16f806c72d71";
	logging-data="3454255"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18yf58JCN2Ltyt6y2zeFvnJR0FKVRUPEk0="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jvFiPqZ5f8enV3/DbjHdNFh/ErY=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <101k1kn$96v$2@reader1.panix.com>
Bytes: 2511

On 6/2/2025 7:24 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <mn.12937e96a0bc3b12.104627@invalid.skynet.be>,
> Marc Van Dyck  <marc.gr.vandyck@invalid.skynet.be> wrote:
>> on 02/06/2025, Lawrence D'Oliveiro supposed :
>>> On Sun, 1 Jun 2025 21:49:59 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 5/30/2025 6:41 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>> The irony of it, that the DEC concept requires creating a separate
>>>>> server process for every client connection,
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> Processes are re-used for task to task servers.
>>>
>>> Hmm. Presumably the process is kept around for a limited time before being
>>> shut down.
>>>
>>> What about multiple concurrent connections? You can’t avoid creating extra
>>> processes in that situation.
> 
> Responding generally, not specifically to Marc, but since I've
> plonked the troll, I don't see his responses (I highly suggest
> others do the same).
> 
> But this assertion in particular is silly and deserves a
> rebuttal for the benefit of others.
> 
> I suppose the troll has never heard of event-driven programming,
> or asynchronous IO, or, for that matter, threads.  Any of these
> allow multiple connections to be served by a single process.

For TCP/IP yes.

For DECnet task to task??

I don't see a way to do that. But please enlighten us.

Arne