Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!alberta!ubc-cs!van-bc!suntac
From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: I wanna have a DOSGate!
Message-ID: <2475@van-bc.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jun 89 13:24:07 GMT
Sender: suntac@van-bc.UUCP
Lines: 53

In <6043@microsoft.UUCP>, bradch@microsoft.UUCP (Bradford Christian ms1) writes:
>In article <17575@louie.udel.EDU> new@udel.EDU (Darren New) writes:
>> [...] In my BBS I plan to go multi-user by having multiple
>>copies of the BBS running at once, possibly after writing the
>>code to be residentable (seemed obvious to me :-).  [...]
>
>I don't know if you've thought about this yet or not so I thought I'd
>bring it up: multiple instances do not a multi-user program make.
> [ ... ]
>Running totaly separate instances will probably also make a CB mode (where two
>users can chat with each other directly) difficult.

It is just as easy to connect users in a 'CB' mode via interprocess messaging
as it is to connect them within a single program.

>My solution to this problem is to have one instance of the program handle
>any number of users.  The main process manages the data base and is the
>only thing that has access to these files.  Each port has it's own process
>which sends messages to the main process when it needs to read or write
>an item in the data base.  This solution not only solves the data base
>access problem, but also makes it real easy to allow two (or more) users
>to chat.

Think modularity. A 'dispatcher' that watches the serial port and kicks off a
module that talks to the serial port. A messaging and mail handler, protocol
modules, and so on. Modularity brings generality if the moduels are well thought
out, with the attendant ease of going to more lines or a different
manufacturer's board. Messaging, up/downloads, and CB become a simple matter of
routing messages.

>I hope this doesn't mess up your plans, but if you hadn't thought of this
>and haven't started coding yet, it should be worth thinking about.  A
>possible alternative to the method I use would be to write a multi-user
>data base handler as a separate program.  You could then run multiple
>instances of you BBS program, one for each user, which would access the
>data base by sending messages to the handler.
>
>Good luck with your program!

While there can be some advantages in having a 'main process', it is certainly
not a requirement, especially in te sense that one process is 'boss'.
Peer-to-peer modularity can be every bit as effective, and offer some unique
advantages, some of which may have nothing to do with the BBS itself.

-larry

--
Van Roy's Law:  An unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 
|   //   Larry Phillips                                                |
| \X/    lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips  |
|        COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322                                        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+