Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!apple!agate!shelby!ucscc.ucsc.edu!gorn!filbo
From: filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us (Bela Lubkin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Resource tracking
Message-ID: <60.filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us>
Date: 27 Oct 89 14:11:28 GMT
References: <8910232238.AA18077@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Organization: R Pentomino
Lines: 18
X-Claimer: I >am< R Pentomino!

In article <8910232238.AA18077@en.ecn.purdue.edu> Jeff Bevis writes:
>If one were to keep track of process resources, what would one be keeping
>track of, aside from memory, message ports, file locks, and, perhaps,
>semaphores?  I've not really given this much thought, but I would like to
>know what the scope of full resource tracking is.

Most importantly, allow new types of resources to be added dynamically.
A program should be able to declare a new type of resource, "volunteering"
to handle tracking of that resource.  The implementation should provide
routines to manage generic resources, so that the program declaring a new
type of resource needs only minimal code to handle what is unusual about
its resource type.  Given this, the basic resource tracking manager could
be limited to what you list above: memory, message ports, file locks,
semaphores, and one addition: resource definitions.

Bela Lubkin    * *    //  filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us  CompuServe: 73047,1112
     @       * *     //   ....ucbvax!ucscc!gorn!filbo  ^^^-VERY slow [months]
R Pentomino    *   \X/    Filbo @ Pyrzqxgl +408-476-4633 & XBBS +408-476-4945