[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch master updated -release-4-0-0alpha6-1111-g8d63c59

[Steven Danneman]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at samba.org]
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:33 PM
> To: samba-technical at lists.samba.org
> Cc: Steven Danneman
> Subject: Re: [SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch master updated -
> release-4-0-0alpha6-1111-g8d63c59
> 
> On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 23:16 -0600, Steven Danneman wrote:
> > The branch, master has been updated
> >        via  8d63c596a0f512c96f5663c0a9bd49d3c98c6df9 (commit)
> >       from  3a1b4c00eb96634229fb730e9b38e8df5180756a (commit)
> >
> > http://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=shortlog;h=master
> >
> >
> > - Log
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > commit 8d63c596a0f512c96f5663c0a9bd49d3c98c6df9
> > Author: Steven Danneman <steven.danneman at isilon.com>
> > Date:   Mon Feb 23 20:46:11 2009 -0800
> >
> >     Refactored sys_fork() and sys_pid() into shared util library
> >
> >     This fixes a bug in 116ce19b, where we didn't clear the pid
cache
> in
> >     become_daemon() and thus the /var/run/smbd.pid didn't match the
> actual
> >     pid of the parent process.
> >
> >     Currently S4 will clear the pid cache on fork but doesn't yet
> take
> >     advantage of the pid cache by using sys_pid() instead of the
> direct
> >     get_pid().
> 
> I realise these questions predate your time, but I think we should
> answer:
> 
> Why do we have a PID cache? (It seems it has caused more trouble then
> it's worth.)
> 
> What operating systems have such a slow getpid() that this complexity
> is worth it?

Good question Andrew.  I don't know the answer :)  Though, there really
isn't much complexity added since we're just storing a single int in a
static variable per process.  So if there is a performance speedup I'd
say the minor annoyance of creating a bug here or there is still worth
it.

-Steven