apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mladen Turk" <mt...@mappingsoft.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] apr_shm_t, a new shared memory API to replace old
Date Tue, 08 Jan 2002 19:14:21 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Bloom" <rbb@covalent.net>
To: "Mladen Turk" <mturk@mappingsoft.com>; "'Aaron Bannert'"
Cc: <dev@apr.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] apr_shm_t, a new shared memory API to replace old

> > Yes, that's my point. Anonymous shmem can be cross-process (on WIN32) if
> > give it the name, then instead using regular file it will be backed up
> > the system paging file. So, you need to name it.
> Once you give it a name, it isn't anonymous anymore.  You want to use
> key-based instead of file-based naming though, so that the underlying
> system is different.  That is fine, this API can handle that.  Because of
> way non-child process shared memory must work, you must communicate the
> name between the two children.  There are only a couple of ways to do
> to make it more portable, Aaron's design requires that you use a file.  If
you are
> using file based shared mem, the file is the actual shared memory. If you
> using key-based shared mem, the file just stores the name of the shared
> segment.
> Ryan

You are right It's not anonymous if you give it a name :).

Imagine the scenario when you want to use the "named" or file backed shmem
that will be created using tmpnam. Then all the processes would need to know
the true path of that file to be able to communicate with you. Of course you
could make that file unique simply stating: all the users of the apr must
have different shmem file names. So I want to make the unique file name but
still be able to access it by It's name like 'Apache 2.0 rev 1'.  On the
other hand you could simply make the temp file and give it the name you
want, and anyone from outside could get your shmem simply naming you.


View raw message