Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Workers
(September 1996)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Patch for 1.94 to avoid starvation when looping for lock
From: Brian Behlendorf <brian @ hyperreal . com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 20:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
To: Chan Wilson <cwilson @ slurp . neu . sgi . com>
Cc: Dave Wolfe <david_wolfe @ risc . sps . mot . com>, John Gilmore <gnu @ toad . com>, majordomo-workers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <199609270018.CAA08690@slurp.neu.sgi.com>


I'm all for exponential backoff.

I'm also all for a system which, at the end of ten minutes or however long
is decided "enough!", the message which was supposed to be acted upon is
placed in a directory somewhere, and a cron job comes through and
processes those delayed requests every hour or two or something.  Or not,
if the load average is too high.  

But I suppose that's 2.0.

	Brian



References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Patch for 1.94 to avoid starvation when looping for lock
From: Chan Wilson <cwilson@slurp.neu.sgi.com>
Next: Re: Patch for 1.94 to avoid starvation when looping for lock
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Patch for 1.94 to avoid starvation when looping for lock
From: Chan Wilson <cwilson@slurp.neu.sgi.com>
Next: Re: Patch for 1.94 to avoid starvation when looping for lock
From: Hugh Messenger <hugh@garply.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com