r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16118]
can't you have a process to manage others using an udp port for instance 
?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16119]
some of these are core apps ...
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16120]
R2 ?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16121]
all r2
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16122]
and so, you could have a specific process which monitors the others, 
using tcp or udp, no ?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16123]
I can monitor some by tcp .. .but how can I use udp to monitor the 
others?
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16124]
the others have some loop and wait process i guess, just insert a 
wait on an udp port as well
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16125]
So, if it is doing stuff .. it will miss the udp ping ?
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16126x2]
no, if the monitor accept some lantency; For example if a process 
is not responding after few pings.
But in the case of huge process, the client process should send himself 
a ping to the monitor to advert is doing stuffs (at some points of 
the code)
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16128]
like a log file
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16129]
eh ?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16130x2]
if you write to a log file, then that's like a ping to a monitor
But actually the monitor is a user app that they run from their desktop 
.. so it can't accept pings from the process.
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16132x2]
but a port dialing is more efficient and has less overhead
why it can't ?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16134]
how does it know where the user app is?
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16135x2]
Simple. Each time a targetted process start,k it send its id to the 
monitor. (hey ! Mr Monitor i'm here and my name is "toto")
it's a standard client/server exchange, each client has to establish 
a connection with the server.
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16137]
So, I need a central server as well...
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16138]
It's the monito actually. You have one monitor (the server) for several 
processes (the clients)
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16139]
I guess it's easier to do it that way then have the user interrogate 
all the processes
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16140]
the monitor open a tcp/udp port and wait for connections.
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16141]
The monitor could be headless and run as a service, with a separate 
GUI process that runs in user space.
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16142]
To run a rebol app as a service it has to be guiless
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16143x3]
it's not obligatory a service.
When a client process start it try
it tries to open a connection with the monitor, it he connection 
fail, he launch himself the monitor, wait few seconds and retry to 
connect.
it he = if the
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16146x2]
Right. A lot of software does the split process thing nowadays, sometimes 
with the GUI running in the tray (or whatever the OS version if that 
is).
if -> of
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16148]
So, how does that work?  the core service launches a gui app that 
sits in the tray?
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16149x2]
the monitor don't necesseary have the need of a gui
the GUI could be another client process
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16151]
No, the monitor doesn't need a gui
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16152]
That usually works by having the core service run on its own, the 
the tray app starting at user login, or on demand.
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16153]
and the gui app communicates by tc to the service?
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16154]
Yup, or whatever other interprocess communication model you prefer 
(DBUS?)
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16155x2]
so need some type of encrypted tcp communications ...
Just asking as I need to scale my apps as I get more and more users
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16157]
Has anyone made a /View tray app that has no default window other 
than the tray app, and maybe a options dialog?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16158]
Need to get rid of all the GUIs ..
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16159]
why that ? the monitor run on the same computer than the serices 
no ?
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16160x2]
You can start a view app in the tray ...
No, the monitor may not be running on the same computer
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16162]
you want monitor the services on a local network ?
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16163]
It only needs to be encrypted if you are communicating between computers. 
It's much harder to break into localhost communication (afaik).
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16164]
Yes monitor services on a number of servers
BrianH
26-Mar-2010
[16165]
Graham, it might be a good idea to have the monitor service on the 
same system as the processes it is monitoring, and then an overall 
monitoring interface that collects the info from the monitoring services 
on various computers.
Graham
26-Mar-2010
[16166]
Well, I hope so .. .currently I only have one server running ... 
but got to make it scaleable!
Steeve
26-Mar-2010
[16167]
hum ok, but if you want the monitor to be able to launch/kill proccesses, 
you'll need of a monitor on each server + a CENTRAL MONITOR to deals 
with all the monitors