I have two processes. I want to copy a few pages of one process to another process such that the values of variables in first process become equal to values of variables of the second process whose pages are copied.
I am not looking for fork. I just want to copy a particular page from one process to another and want the first process to point to same memory area as the other process.
Any help would be great.
It sounds like you want memmap. Unfortunately, memmap does so many things and I don't know exactly what you want to do so I cannot tell you what setting you ned to use. It would depend upon exactly who you want to use things.
Related
My process creates a log file and appends a new line at the end of the file by using a, e.g:
fopen("log.txt", "a");
The order of the writes is not critical, but I need to ensure that fopen always succeeds. My question is, can the call above be executed from multiple processes at the same time on Windows, Linux and macOS without any race-condition?
If not, what is the most common and easy way to ensure I can write to the log file? There is file-lokcing, but also a file-lock (aka log.txt.lock) possible. Could anyone share some insights or resources which go more into detail?
If you do not use any synchronization between processes, you'll highly likely have moment when several processes will try to write to the file and the best you can get is mesh of input strings.
In order to synchronize any work in several processes (multiprocessing module). Use Lock. It will prevent several processes to do some work simultaneously.
It will look something like this:
import multiprocessing
# create lock in main process and "send" it to child processes.
lock = multiprocessing.Lock()
# ...
# in child Process
with lock:
do_some_work()
If you need more detailed example, feel free to ask.
Also you can check example in official docs
I'm dealing with multiple processes that read eachothers's drawables and thus need synchronization. XLockDisplay is supposed to "lock out all other threads" from using the display, but does that apply across multiple processes?
Also, do all processes need to call XInitThreads or just the one(s) calling XLockDisplay?
XLockDisplay func (and LockDisplay macros) has to be used inside the same XClient app, ie process... They make no sense btw XClients (so btw 2 processes). This is a way to protect against multiple threads (so inside the same process) attempting to access the same X connection (eg see GLX-1.4, ch. 2.7)
In order to read the whole content (buffer) of another window, you could take a look at any app that makes a screenshot from your desktop or from a single window (see 'scrot' source code for example).
If you want to exchange data btw XClients, use their Properties/Atoms (see XLib ICCC).
Say I want to write a tail like application for Windows to monitor a bunch of files. Such an application should report when some of the monitored files is updated by any other application.
It can be assumed that the files being monitored are being constantly appended by other processes, but not modified in any other way. Before implementing some pooling solution (that is, iterate through the files to be monitored, seek to the end of each one, record this pointer, compare to previous end etc.) I would appreciate if someone more experienced with the Overlapped IO could tell me if I can make use of it.
For instance, is it possible to write the monitoring application in such a way that it opens all the files that need to be monitored, seek to the end of them, and try to read one byte with ReadFileEx() registering a callback.
Is there a way to make this work so that when another process write to some of the files the proper callback is invoked? Or necessarily the monitoring application will always get an EOF for such a call?
Is this approach a sensible one? Or is it a bad idea?
We have a PDF document processing system, implemented in AppleScript (where we call the scripts from the shell using osascript). In some of the scripts, we call Acrobat Preflight Droplets from the Applescript.
This does usually work without problems. However, in some cases, where the processed document is big or/and complex. the droplet returns control to the script before the report is written and the document is moved to the "success" or "failure" folder. The consequence is that the process continues, but without the moved file, it eventually fails.
The workaround so far has been to add a delay after those droplet calls. This does help, but it is a waste of time for small documents, and there will always be a document big and complex enough to take longer than the delay.
We also found out that the time needed for finishing writing the report and moving the document depends on the speed of the system (had to be expected…).
The workaround would be to calculate the delay from the document size, its number of pages, and a machine-dependent parameter. Document size, and number of pages are no big deal; they can be retrieved in the Applescript.
The problem is the machine-dependent parameter, which can be determined experimentally. But how do I make that parameter available to all the scripts needing it?
Incorporating it into the scripts is not an option, because we have a number of systems installed, and if we would do that, we'd end up in a maintenance nightmare. Passing it as an argument in the initial system call is also not possible, because the calls are many, and again would lead to a maintenance nightmare.
So, is there a way to set up a place where that machine parameter can be stored and easily called from any Applescript, no matter how it itself is called.
Thanks a lot for your advice.
You might find the Property List Suite in System Events useful. It’s a standard means of storing and then retrieving such information. Property List files themselves are simply XML files, so you can even create them outside of AppleScript and then read them within your scripts.
There’s a description with examples at https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/58007/how-do-i-pass-variables-values-between-subsequent-applescript-runs-persistent
A simple suggestion if you only have one paramater to keep track of would be to just have a text file in a known location on each machine. The only content of the text file would be the machine paramater. I like to use the Application Support folder this kind of thing.
Assuming your machine parameter is CPU speed. You can save a text file in /Library/Application Support/Preflight Scripts/machinecpu.txt with the contents:
2.4
Then in Applescript, you would just read the text file.:
set machineParam to read file "Macintosh HD:Library:Application Support:Preflight Scripts:machinecpu.txt"
I would like to do the following :
I want to imple,ment the concept of FIFO in normal files using GUILE.
Two processes should communicate via a normal text file, that a third process , if needed, can access.
The subordinate of the original two processes should write in the file, line after line, that is append. So far so good. (implemented in c++)
The master proces however, should treat this file as a FIFO, it should read the first line, and do somethong corresponding to it, and delete the first line leaving the rest intact.
The problems are :
While the Master is accessing the file, the subordinate may come to a point where it must write there, leading to a conflict.
Popping the first line may need reading the whole ile out, in a string, poping the first thereof, and then saving it, which is memory intensive, and the second saving action may again conflict with the child trying to write there,
I wanted to implement this in GUILE, because since it is the official OS extension language, there might be better ways which addresses the above two issues.
But in the web I do not find much to orient myself. Please help, sorry for the lewss than concrete question, then I dont have a code snippet to show.