Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!root From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: DCRON Message-ID: <2074@van-bc.UUCP> Date: 28 Dec 88 17:10:16 GMT Sender: root@van-bc.UUCP Lines: 39 In <8812262323.AA20514@cory.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes: >:> No need. DCron checks the file timestamp every minute (this takes >: So you're back to going to disk anyway by looking at the timestamp. > No No, even with only 5 buffers, the two that are needed for the >Lock/Examine are most likely cached after the first try. And, of >course, when it *does* access the disk it's only to read a sector or two... >it only writes (updates the log) when there is actually something to do, and >unless you have a * * * * * * entry which is run every minute, this doesn't >happen often. I don't know about your setup and operating methods, but I use my machine a lot. I'd be willing to bet that after starting cron in a startup-sequence, I'd lose that cached data in a matter of minutes, due to all the other activity. Was there any real objection to reading crontab into memory and using a message to signal an update? (I'm not asking you to do it, just wondering if there are any pitfalls I haven't thought of) > And people ask me if I'm a patient person ... Actually, the >problem is probably due to network propogation times (or people not reading >their news backwards... ALWAYS read your news messages from the end to >the beginning so you don't make too many redundant replies!). Sorry about that.. I usually pay better attention. > -Matt -larry -- "Intelligent CPU? I thought you said Intel CPU!" -Anonymous IBM designer- +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+