> On Nov 7, 2019, at 2:07 AM, Scott, Barry wrote:
>
> On Thursday, 7 November 2019 05:29:34 GMT Sean DiZazzo wrote:
>> If you need guaranteed delivery of the data, why not just use a TCP
>> connection to the unix socket, instead of a UDP connection which inherently
>> can lose data? In that ca
On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 18:23:41 GMT Waqar Khan wrote:
> Thanks for the info.
> Yeah, it seems that UDS is the way to go. (I need to read more about them).
>
> Actually, is there a simple example you can give that can help me
> understand this a bit better?
> Thanks
The code I have I cannot
On Thursday, 7 November 2019 05:29:34 GMT Sean DiZazzo wrote:
> If you need guaranteed delivery of the data, why not just use a TCP
> connection to the unix socket, instead of a UDP connection which inherently
> can lose data? In that case I don't think your patch would be needed.
>
> I didn't lo
If you need guaranteed delivery of the data, why not just use a TCP
connection to the unix socket, instead of a UDP connection which inherently
can lose data? In that case I don't think your patch would be needed.
I didn't look at the source, so perhaps I missed something.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at
Thanks for the info.
Yeah, it seems that UDS is the way to go. (I need to read more about them).
Actually, is there a simple example you can give that can help me
understand this a bit better?
Thanks
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 9:07 AM Scott, Barry
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 16:43:52 GMT
On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 16:43:52 GMT Waqar Khan wrote:
> Hi Barry,
> Thanks for the response. Where can I read more about (1). It seems
> like that is something I need to explore.
> As we already have (2) (cache for each process).
> Thanks again for your help.
We use the UDS (Unix do
Hi Barry,
Thanks for the response. Where can I read more about (1). It seems
like that is something I need to explore.
As we already have (2) (cache for each process).
Thanks again for your help.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 8:39 AM Scott, Barry
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 14:21:22
On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 14:21:22 GMT Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 07:19:56 CET Waqar Khan wrote:
> > Hi,
> > So, I am writing a twisted server. This server spawn multiple child
> > processes using reactor spawnProcess that initializes a process
> > protocol.
> >
Hi Marteen,
Thanks for the response.
When you say "when one process mutates the dictionary while another is
looking up something or also mutating it." Do you mean that a key/value
pair is getting modified or is it that a dict, in general, is getting
modified.
The first one is not really a concer
On Wednesday, 6 November 2019 07:19:56 CET Waqar Khan wrote:
> Hi,
> So, I am writing a twisted server. This server spawn multiple child
> processes using reactor spawnProcess that initializes a process
> protocol.
>
> Now, each of the childprocess receives some REST requests. Each
> process has a
Hi,
So, I am writing a twisted server. This server spawn multiple child
processes using reactor spawnProcess that initializes a process protocol.
Now, each of the childprocess receives some REST requests. Each process has
a dict that acts as cache.
Now, I want to share dict across processes.
In ge
11 matches
Mail list logo