|
Re: New supervisor restart strategy: msg#00329lang.erlang.general
Chandru, You have one supervisor for each worker. That may sound like a lot of manpower but this is Erlang. :) -Vance On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 11:24:20AM +0000, Chandrashekhar Mullaparthi wrote: } } Thinking more about this, there is still one problem. All the dynamic } children in this second level supervisor will still be affected by one of } them misbehaving. Imagine a scenario where each child process is handling } one TCP connection. If one of them is misbehaving, we dont want the rest of } them to be affected. How would you achieve this using existing supervisor } functionality. } } cheers } Chandru |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Megaco and step 8 in RFC example: 00329, Micael Karlberg |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: file: module and character special files: 00329, Richard A. O'Keefe |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: New supervisor restart strategyi: 00329, Chandrashekhar Mullaparthi |
| Next by Thread: | Supervisors with no children?: 00329, Vance Shipley |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |