Sounds a bit complicated, for the beta1 version, but I may move to
something like this as my confidence grows.
Is the 'deamon script' a purely server-side app? This is a bit of a prob
at them moment as only have FTP for live server and my test box is
in the early stages of dementure.
Would this make it quite awkward to debug? As only have Bindows running 'perl -d ..'
from the prompt at the mo.
I think I'll just have the original search script check for files older than
a couple of hours. (I know this is a really crap way to do the job, but
I don't care anymore!)
Is that is the only way to communicate with a $child? Without having
to Kill() it!
Thanks for the ideas and they are most appreciated,
they just make lazy people like me feel tired (oh crap!).
Maybe another day I'll feel full of perl-beens.
TommyGun.
www.y2kdiary.com
-----Original Message-----
>From : Pierre Smolarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To : [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date : 19 July 2001 13:01:58
Subject : Re: Do I use fork() for this?
not really the best way in my opinion....
>
>what you could do is use two scripts.....
>
>first script is the cgi, it does what needs to be done to get the data and
>then pipes it to a deamon script that forks off children for each proccess.
>The cgi then askes the deamon on the status of its child as the child and
>parent has communication between each other. The child will die a natural
>death and you could set the deamon to autoreap.
>
>All your cgi will then do is transilate the deamon to the user, basicly
>saying. ?Sorry.. still busy...? and once the deamon tells you its ok.. the
>cgi will read the DBM or whatever you plan to do.
>
>If your a little nerves of all this conversation between deamon and children
>and cgi.. you could use temp files with the status.... and you just delete
>or change the contents of the tmp file... your cgi will just check whats up
>with the tmp.
>
>make sence?
>
>Pierre
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:53 PM
>Subject: Do I use fork() for this?
>
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'm currently trying to put a little ?search engine? together for
>> a small web site, basically searching through a bunch of files for
>> matching keywords.
>> As I want a Progress Page while the script is doing its work, I show
>> a page while the script is searching (had to use $| to achieve) and
>> store the results in a DBM.
>> So when the search/progress script is finished I activate a JavaScript
>> doc.location command to call the script again with diff params, thus
>> reading the results DBM and outputing page by page.
>>
>> What I want to do is... put a ?kill time? of say 20 mins on the DBM file
>> so that it gets tidied away. So...
>>
>> $child = Fork() {
>> some code to Sleep(20 mins);
>> then Unlink(results DBM);
>> }
>>
>> What if the client is still accessing the search results at 20 mins?
>> I read through PerlDoc perlfork and it recommends not Kill()ing Children.
>>
>> Can my script, while requests for result pages rain down, communicate
>> with the $child (richkid ;o), thus sustaining the $child's life?
>>
>>
>> Probably not the most practical way to achieve my objective,
>> but I'm not the best at this programming lark. :o)
>>
>> TommyGun.
>>
>> www.y2kdiary.com
>>
>> -----
>>
>> 20 email addresses from 15,000 domain names - free at
>http://www.another.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----
>
>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
-----
20 email addresses from 15,000 domain names - free at http://www.another.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
