| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<20241011131151.00003a02@yahoo.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Subject: Re: Apache + mod_php performance Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 13:11:51 +0300 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 88 Message-ID: <20241011131151.00003a02@yahoo.com> References: <vcv0bl$39mnj$1@dont-email.me> <vdmq7c$3re7f$1@dont-email.me> <vdn7mf$3mc75$1@dont-email.me> <vdp8kn$a67s$1@dont-email.me> <vdp9f6$jbc$1@reader1.panix.com> <20241006181231.0000370b@yahoo.com> <vdvoeq$1jerg$1@dont-email.me> <20241007110747.000030cc@yahoo.com> <vea4e1$3grd3$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:11:58 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4a02cc890752be5eb098a21c65c0f594"; logging-data="3811362"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX199a8SgT3YjkQWpyFtiKcVscv1hxQN4lSc=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:CqlS69wjxprmwRV9M+mE/Q1UkLA= X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.34; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Bytes: 4578 On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 23:01:13 -0400 Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: > On 10/7/2024 4:07 AM, Michael S wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:35:36 -0400 > > Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: > > > >> On 10/6/2024 11:12 AM, Michael S wrote: > >>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 17:43:02 -0000 (UTC) > >>> cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote: > >>> > >>>> In article <vdp8kn$a67s$1@dont-email.me>, > >>>> Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: > >>>>> On 10/3/2024 7:00 PM, Chris Townley wrote: > >>>>>> [snip] > >>>>>> I don't remember George, but we have certainly woken up Dave! > >>>>>> ;) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and I am sure the troll is happy... > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm not sure whether I've been insulted? > >>>> > >>>> I suspect the "troll" reference is to Lawrence. Sadly, Arne can > >>>> not help himself when it comes to resisting arguing with that > >>>> clown. > >>>> > >>>> - Dan C. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Troll or not, but the question about ability to pass open TCP > >>> socket to child process (or, may be, to unrelated process) under > >>> VMS is a good question. > >>> As a lurker, I am waiting for the expert answer with interest. > >>> > >> > >> Well, some of the issue is in the text of the question. What does > >> one mean be "pass socket"? > >> > >> When creating a socket, one can specify it to be shared. What I > >> was doing was passing the information to a worker process, then > >> letting the worker process open the existing socket. > >> > >> So, would that be considered "passing an open socket"? > >> > > > > Yes, it would be. > > > > On Windows one has to go through similar 3-stage procedure: > > - [in parent process] acquire magic record from the open socket by > > means of WSADuplicateSocket() > > - pass the record to child by any of available IPC mechanisms > > - [in child process] use magic record to re-open socket with > > WSASocket() > > > > I never had a need of for it in practice. Looking at docs it seems > > that the procedure above has at least one inconvenient aspect - the > > target process has to exist at the moment of WSADuplicateSocket() > > call. Still, I suppose that it's better than nothing. > > > >> I can post some of the development code is anyone is interested. I > >> was working on the inter-process communications when I dropped the > >> project. I believe I did open the shared socket in the worker > >> process. > >> > > > > May be, others are interested in the code. > > For me, I'd rather read textual description of the procedure and war > > story of making it work. > > > > Actually, simple. > > 1) Create the socket in listener process > 2) Pass device name to worker process > 3) Assign a channel to the device in worker process > 4) deassign the channel in listener process (if desired) > There are few pieces in your simple explanation that I don't understand: - How does listener get a device name? - What is "channel"? Is it the same as 'socket'? - How one "assigns" channel to device? I would guess that device has to be open before that? - Is device name of the socket system-global? If yes, does it mean that any process in the system that happens to know a name can open a device and assign it to channel?