7 Jul
2011
7 Jul
'11
8:44 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Neil Wilson wrote: > On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 01:09 +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > >> Are there any plans to move from different daemons to single one? >> > > Better would be to split them out onto a message bus with a common > controlling CLI interface. > > That way they can talk to each other while maintaining process > separation. It is very useful indeed to have multiple calculations going > on at the same time without the risk of one of them blowing up and > destroying the whole lot. Actually, if we began talk about splitting into multiple daemons because of multiple calculations and protocol bugs causing entire process crash - - better to discuss splitting based not on address family but protocol or protocol-instance-base. Every architecture has its own pros and cons. Direct function calls for any interested protocol is faster than doing syscalls for every unix socket reads/writes and consumes less CPU resources. Large route updates/reads are addressed in bird by splitting them into smaller parts permitting other protocols doing their IO Anyway, I'm talking about improving parts in _current_ architecture, not about changing architecture (protocols exchange model) at all. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk4VcecACgkQwcJ4iSZ1q2nUHwCgopUrpeRbCCljQ5+JFqfDbnuo pmkAnjxo041Yep0mgEh6RcZknEiqdsG3 =5Evq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----