[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Has anyone written a "surrogate" parent for shell backend?

To: Julio Sánchez Fernández <j_sanchez@stl.es>
Subject: Re: Has anyone written a "surrogate" parent for shell backend?
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 08:36:22 -0700
Cc: "Kunkel, Ronald Dale (Ron)" <rdkunkel@lucent.com>, "'openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org'" <openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org>
In-reply-to: <39410AC8.2A5B2F11@stl.es>
References: <40854296EC36D311A8850008C7BB9D8DE82A48@OH0012EXCH001U>

At 05:18 PM 6/9/00 +0200, Julio Sánchez Fernández wrote:
>"Kunkel, Ronald Dale (Ron)" wrote:
>> I would like to hear about anyone's experience with writing a surrogate
>> parent
>> to prevent deadlock problems when using shell backend. (Code samples would
>> be great)
>
>Possibly you might find interesting samples in the alpha versions for
>apache 2.0 that combines processes and threads and, presumably :-), still
>supports CGIs.

Or threaded inetd replacements...

Kurt

References:
- Has anyone written a "surrogate" parent for shell backend?
  - From: "Kunkel, Ronald Dale (Ron)" <rdkunkel@lucent.com>
- Re: Has anyone written a "surrogate" parent for shell backend?
  - From: Julio Sánchez Fernández <j_sanchez@stl.es>

Prev by Date: Re: Has anyone written a "surrogate" parent for shell backend?
Next by Date: Re: IPv6 detection
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread