Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Ben Franksen via Tech-talk <tech-talk at aps.anl.gov> · Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:28:52 +0200

Am 18.06.20 um 18:18 schrieb Ralph Lange via Tech-talk:
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 17:37, Michael Davidsaver <mdavidsaver at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Why not bake procServ into the IOC executable?  It could still fork() off
>> the a child process for the actual IOC, but without an execvp().
>> (or at worst, to re-exec the same executable)
>>
>> Of course fork() from a multi-threaded process needs some care.
>> As well as attention to FD_CLOEXEC.
> 
> As you know, the traditional Linux approach is to break up applications
> with large complex functionality into small independent units that each
> serve a narrow scope of purpose and can be combined on the command line.
> procServ is following that approach.
> 
> Looking at the list of command line options and features of procServ (that
> were all added on user request btw.) - do you want all this being part of
> the IOC?
> Your idea sounds a lot like the CA Gateway's quirky server mode - that IMHO
> should be deprecated in favor of running it under procServ, to put an end
> to running two hardly distinguishable processes for each Gateway instance.

Exactly right, on all points.

Cheers
Ben

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System