Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 21:29:59 +0800 (CST) From: Brian Tao <taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw> To: hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org, Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: 16-bit pids? (was Re: 16, 32, and 64bit types?) Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.950901212739.21658E-100000@aries> In-Reply-To: <199508312021.WAA27457@uriah.heep.sax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 31 Aug 1995, J Wunsch wrote:
>
> That's not the problem. The actual problem are long-living processes
> that cause collisions since you expect temp files like
> /foo/bar/file.<pid> to be unique within the system.
Why would a collision occur? If you have along-living process at,
say, pid 151 (like what 'xdm' is on my machine right now) and the most
recently used pid was 150 (assuming it had cycled around), wouldn't
the scheduler/kernel just see that 151 is still running, and number
the next process 152? Is that the type of "PID collision" you are
referring to?
--
Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao
taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.91.950901212739.21658E-100000>