Re: [boost] [interprocess][process] Synchronizing libraries and efforts (+ bugs)

From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-01 12:19:49

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Boris" <boriss_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [interprocess][process] Synchronizing libraries and 
efforts (+ bugs)

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:23:30 +0200, Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> -> Using named pipes has been problematic because it returns errors when 
> launching multiple processes aggressively: Error 231 - All Pipes are 
> Busy. This does not happen with anonymous pipes and I think it has some 
> relationship with the guid code. By the way, I think a uuid library is 
> too much to create a unique identifier to be shared with the child a 
> simple atomic count would to the job in my opinion. That would reduce 
> Boost.Process dependencies.

An atomic count might not be sufficient as it would be unique only per
process. As I used Boost.Uuid only for convenience though I'll replace it
with an atomic count plus a random number to drop the dependency.

Hi,

I have implemented a locally unique identifier that can be used interprocess 
(see. 
http://www.nabble.com/Request-interest-on-a-Locally-Unique-Identifier-library-td16014373.html#a16014373)
Do you think that something like that could be useful for your needs?

Best,

Vicente