Swifty <steve.j.swift@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:36:44 +0000, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
><jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>Wouldn't it be better to have a log per process,
>
> I'm thinking of things like my outbound email log, my error log and other
> such "global" logs that can potentially be appended to by any process
> running code that I've written. The logs are not peculiar to the process,
> but the functions that the process uses.

I'd still consider having the processes write what are in essence
transaction requests (add this text to a log) somewhere process-specific,
and have some other process pick those up and update the actual log. Apart
from anything else you can circumvent the problems of having multiple
processes simultaneously trying to append data to a single log file that
way.

It's probably be overkill but there may be a message-queue handling
app/daemon you could use for that.


> But anyway, the bug is that I cannot write to a file over which I have
> write authority, and that is what should get fixed. Then everything in my
> garden would be rosy.

Escept for the multiple simultaneous access issue. IIRC (having seen your
common routines code) you don't have your log write code do multiple
retries, nor have a fallback if none of those work.

I did do on some of the TSO/ISPF applications I wrote long ago; I also made
sure that if someone chose to view such a log then the app would make a
temporary copy of it (in VIO usually) and let them browse that, so that no
viewing process would hold an ENQ on the real log for more than a tiny
snippet of time.

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsreplyaaa@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".