Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!super!udel!gatech!uflorida!mailrus!ncar!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU!dillon
From: dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: DCRON
Message-ID: <8812232110.AA01833@postgres.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 23 Dec 88 21:10:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 27

:ARPA:	eric@topaz.rutgers.edu or eric@ulysses.att.com
:>>memory taken up may not be worth it).
:>I think that this might be worth it, in some form or another.
:
:The easy way to do this is as follows:
:
:	If the "cron" is run a second time, have it send a signal to the
:	cron that is already running and then exit. This signal will tell the 
:	running copy to read the table again.
:
:So, you make a change to the table and run cron again. This simply signals the 
:cron which is already running and then exits. DropCloth worked in a similiar 

	No need.  DCron checks the file timestamp every minute (this takes
essentially 0 CPU), and if it changes it aborts its (possibly long) timeout
for the normal scan and forces one immediately.

>fashion to kill itself if it found it was already running. This eliminates
>the need for seperate commands or switches to do this sort of stuff...
>
>-Eric

	Good idea for a different reason.  Kim actually suggested that to
me (not allowing two cron's to run at the same time) but I forgot to add
it.

					-Matt