Project review: Parallel KDC
ghudson at MIT.EDU
Thu Mar 11 18:28:10 EST 2010
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 17:54 -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> - I don't see the need for two options. One option will do.
To clarify, I am only adding one option (-w NUM). The project proposal
mentions an existing option (-n) as being exclusive with -w, because
"don't fork, but fork off 5 worker threads" doesn't make sense.
Or at least, that was my thinking at the time. Since then, it became
clear to me that there needs to be a supervisor process to make the
existing -P pidfile option meaningful. -n -w 5 could mean "fork off
five worker threads and run the supervisor in the foreground." I don't
know what would be a good application for that, other than perhaps the
More information about the krbdev