Re: Loading time of scotty

Doug Hughes (Doug.Hughes@Eng.Auburn.EDU)
Wed, 19 Mar 1997 12:36:27 -0600

>Using a server to resolve things might be fast enough if the IPC
>interactions between the server and the Tnm processes are fast
>enough. The only IPC mechanism which I would consider fast enough is
>actually shared memory. I never thought about using shared memory
>before and how difficult it will be to put the internal MIB tree into
>a shared memory segment. Before spending time on it: Does anyone out
>there know how portable shared memory is across UNIX systems? And what
>about Windows? Has Windows something comparable to shared memory?
>

I don't know about anybody else, but it gives me shivers just thinking
about it. :)

Windows has pretty bad memory management behavior to begin with. Perhaps
winNT has shared memory, but I don't think 95 or 3.11 have anything
comparable to the ipcs stuff. Even the cross platform Unix stuff can
get gnarly (I've heard). Do yourself a favor and spare yourself the
inevitable aneurism. ;)

I think a memory caching tcp/udp mechanism might be interesting though.
The first lookup would perhaps take a slight hit, but then it would
be cached in memory for later use. The server process would serve
up MIBS as needed from a memory base.

--
____________________________________________________________________________
Doug Hughes					Engineering Network Services
System/Net Admin  				Auburn University
			doug@eng.auburn.edu





--
!! This message is brought to you via the `tkined & scotty' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To subscribe or
!! unsubscribe, send a mail message to <tkined-request@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>.
!! See http://wwwsnmp.cs.utwente.nl/~schoenw/scotty/ for more information.