Two Programming Questions

Conor P. Cahill cpcahil at virtech.uucp
Wed Aug 29 22:15:52 AEST 1990


In article <1990Aug28.221823.3897 at chinet.chi.il.us> les at chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
>In article <1990Aug27.230044.13699 at virtech.uucp> cpcahil at virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
>
>>>just forget about using shared memory and use a real file with file
>>>locking instead.  If it is being constantly accessed, it will be in
>>>memory anyway.

A.  I didn't write that.  (be sure you attribute quotes of articles 
    correctly).

>I've considered opening a real file mapped against the shared memory
>just to be able to use the file locking routines to arbitrate
>access (i.e. lock the file region but access the memory segment
>instead).  Does anyone know how this would work performance-wise
>compared to any reasonable alternatives?

There should be no significant performance problems with doing this (although
you code will have to be careful to implement your semantics).  Locking an
area of the file does not require that the file data area be read from 
disk and therefore will not cause any disk i/o and it doesn't cause
an update to the inode.

-- 
Conor P. Cahill            (703)430-9247        Virtual Technologies, Inc.,
uunet!virtech!cpcahil                           46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
                                                Sterling, VA 22170 



More information about the Comp.unix.i386 mailing list