On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:00 AM, Shulgin, Oleksandr <oleksandr.shulgin@zalando.de> wrote: > Please see attached for implementation of this approach. The most > surprising thing is that it actually works :)
It's cool to see these interesting ideas for using some of the code I've been working on for the last couple of years. However, it seems to me that a better design would avoid the use of shm_mq. Instead of having the guy who asks the question create a DSM, have the guy who sends back the answer create it. Then, he can just make the DSM big enough to store the entire string. I think that's going to be a lot more robust than what you have here.
Please, can you explain what is wrong on using of shm_mq? It works pretty well now.
There can be a contra argument, why don't use shm_mq, because it does data exchange between processes and this patch introduce new pattern for same thing.
