in reply to Re^2: IPC via named pipes, losing some messages
in thread IPC via named pipes, losing some messages

"ROSE" has got to be the weirdest line ending I've ever seen.

I took the liberty of cleaning up your code a bit.

# Non blocking open open (FH, "+<", $config->{'pipe'} ) || die "Unable to open $config->{' +pipe'}"; my $buf = ''; # Loop forever. while (1) { my $rv = sysread( FH, $buf, 2048, length($buf) ); die("Error reading from pipe: $!\n") if !defined($rv); # 9/4/8 A request is C,DIR,1ROSE # Multiple requests can come through on one read ie C,FOO,1ROSEC,B +AR,1ROSE while ($buf =~ s/(.*?ROSE)//s) { my $rec = $1; Log( { logfile => $log_file, text => "trace: START: $rec" }) if + TRACE; if ( $rec =~ /^RELOAD,/ ) { # Reread the config file Log({logfile=>$log_file, text=> qq{RELOAD: Reloading confi +g}}); load_config(); } else { process_input( { data => $rec } ); } } } # while 1

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: IPC via named pipes, losing some messages
by ftumsh (Scribe) on Apr 23, 2008 at 11:24 UTC
    Thanks for that. I'm going to test it next week. I would do it sooner but I'm off tomorrow and I don't like sending software live before I'm away. It tends to generate tedious wtf have you done now telephone calls... Could you explain what you mean in your bullet points, 1 and 3 please? John
      • Re: I fixed a bug where a single message could be considered two.

        If "C,DIR,1ROSE" is sent over the pipe, the reader might only read "C,DI" which you were treating as an entire message. Then you would proceed to treat "R,1ROSE" as a second message. I fixed this keeping message fragments in the buffer and appending to the unprocessed data in the buffer instead of using a fresh buffer every pass.

        The bug in question might not actually exist due to the select, but it's hard to be sure and would be OS-dependent.

      • Re: I replaced split since you have a record terminator rather than a record separator.

        split is useful when your data looks like "ITEM SEP ITEM SEP ITEM". It doesn't make much sense when your data looks like "ITEM TERM ITEM TERM ITEM TERM", as is the case for you.

        Ah, I see. Thanks for you time ikegami. The new code works like a charm. Not only does it improve on mine in readability, it appears to be a whole lot more efficient. The load on the machine has gone down! John