just wanted to ask about this Fork question. I am really confused as to what the answer would be. If a process with PID 14 calls the fork function and new process will be created with PID 27. In process 27, what is the return value of the fork function?
Related
I have this little test program that tracks PID's as they are created and shut down.
I am investigating a problem that my program has found and would like to ask you about this
in order to have a better idea on what's going on.
When a windows process is started, it gets a PID but when the process is shut down, does the PID
become retired (like a star basketballer's jersey number) or is it possible for a new, entirely
unrelated, process to be created under that released PID?
Thanks
Yes, process IDs may be recycled by the system. They become available for this as soon as the last handle to the process has been closed.
Raymond Chen discussed this matter here: When does a process ID become available for reuse?
The process ID is a value associated with the process object, and as
long as the process object is still around, so too will its process
ID. The process object remains as long as the process is still running
(the process implicitly retains a reference to itself) or as long as
somebody still has a handle to the process object.
If you think about it, this makes sense, because as long as there is
still a handle to the process, somebody can call WaitForSingleObject
to wait for the process to exit, or they can call GetExitCodeProcess
to retrieve the exit code, and that exit code has to be stored
somewhere for later retrieval.
When all handles are closed, then the kernel knows that nobody is
going to ask whether the process is still running or what its exit
code is (because you need a handle to ask those questions). At which
point the process object can be destroyed, which in turn destroys the
process ID.
I ran a test for about an hour and in that time 302 processes exits and 70 of them had PIDs in common (same PID was used for a new process). So that would say they are reused frequently.
Evidently, if the process is terminated, its PID is available for reuse.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms683215%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
Remarks
Until a process terminates, its process identifier uniquely identifies it on the system. For more information about access rights, see Process Security and Access Rights.
I would like to wait in linux (Ubuntu 11.10) for a load of processes to finish. Each of these processes has a different pid but the same name. Is it possible to do this?
EDIT:
Perhaps I should specify that I don't necessarily know what the pid are, just the process name.
EDIT:
Thanks for the answers; Kevin's seems to do what I want. However, it doesn't work in the specific application I have, so I've posted a more detailed follow-up question here.
wait $(pgrep programName)
Ought to do it.
wait $(pidof processname)
perhaps.
As long as you have the pid of these processes:
wait $pid_of_process
That should do it.
I've just wrote a program that forks one process. The child process just displays "HI" 200 times. The father process just says he's the father.
I've printed out both pids.
When I run my program multiple times, I see that the parent's pid stays the same, which is normal. What I don't understand is why the child's pid keeps getting incremented by 2, and exactly 2.
My question: Is this the standard method of pid generation in Ubuntu? Incrementing by 2?
PIDs happen to be handed out monotonically increasing in Linux 2.6, but why does it matter which you get? Don't rely on any specific behavior. If there is a skip of +2 it might simply be because another process happened to spawn a child. Or because +1 would have reached a PID that is already in use.
Found a reference here saying that vfork() consumes a pid as a byproduct of its operation. As well, in some cases, if you're forking from a shell script, the fork might spawn a new shell before your actual script gets involved, which would also consume a pid.
I'd suggest suspending your program between a couple forks, and see if there's another process occupying those "missing" pids.
I want to limit the subprocesses count to 3. Once it hits 3 i wait until one of the processes stops and then execute a new one. I'm using Kernel.fork to start the process.
How do i get the number of running subprocesses? or is there a better way to do this?
A good question, but I don't think there's such a method in Ruby, at least not in the standard library. There's lots of gems out there....
This problem though sounds like a job for the Mutex class. Look up the section Condition Variables here on how to use Ruby's mutexes.
I usually have a Queue of tasks to be done, and then have a couple of threads consuming tasks until they receive an item indicating the end of work. There's an example in "Programming Ruby" under the Thread library. (I'm not sure if I should copy and paste the example to Stack Overflow - sorry)
My solution was to use trap("CLD"), to trap SIGCLD whenever a child process ended and decrease the counter (a global variable) of processes running.
I have a long running process and I need it to launch another process (that will run for a good while too). I need to only start it, and then completely forget about it.
I managed to do what I needed by scooping some code from the Programming Ruby book, but I'd like to find the best/right way, and understand what is going on. Here's what I got initially:
exec("whatever --take-very-long") if fork.nil?
Process.detach($$)
So, is this the way, or how else should I do it?
After checking the answers below I ended up with this code, which seems to make more sense:
(pid = fork) ? Process.detach(pid) : exec("foo")
I'd appreciate some explanation on how fork works. [got that already]
Was detaching $$ right? I don't know why this works, and I'd really love to have a better grasp of the situation.
Alnitak is right. Here's a more explicit way to write it, without $$
pid = Process.fork
if pid.nil? then
# In child
exec "whatever --take-very-long"
else
# In parent
Process.detach(pid)
end
The purpose of detach is just to say, "I don't care when the child terminates" to avoid zombie processes.
The fork function separates your process in two.
Both processes then receive the result of the function. The child receives a value of zero/nil (and hence knows that it's the child) and the parent receives the PID of the child.
Hence:
exec("something") if fork.nil?
will make the child process start "something", and the parent process will carry on with where it was.
Note that exec() replaces the current process with "something", so the child process will never execute any subsequent Ruby code.
The call to Process.detach() looks like it might be incorrect. I would have expected it to have the child's PID in it, but if I read your code right it's actually detaching the parent process.
Detaching $$ wasn't right. From p. 348 of the Pickaxe (2nd Ed):
$$ Fixnum The process number of the program being executed. [r/o]
This section, "Variables and Constants" in the "Ruby Language" chapter, is very handy for decoding various ruby short $ constants - however the online edition (the first
So what you were actually doing was detaching the program from itself, not from its child.
Like others have said, the proper way to detach from the child is to use the child's pid returned from fork().
The other answers are good if you're sure you want to detach the child process. However, if you either don't mind, or would prefer to keep the child process attached (e.g. you are launching sub-servers/services for a web app), then you can take advantage of the following shorthand
fork do
exec('whatever --option-flag')
end
Providing a block tells fork to execute that block (and only that block) in the child process, while continuing on in the parent.
i found the answers above broke my terminal and messed up the output. this is the solution i found.
system("nohup ./test.sh &")
just in case anyone has the same issue, my goal was to log into a ssh server and then keep that process running indefinitely. so test.sh is this
#!/usr/bin/expect -f
spawn ssh host -l admin -i cloudkey
expect "pass"
send "superpass\r"
sleep 1000000