joel at fentin.com
Fri Apr 25 11:21:37 PDT 2008
Gautam Dey wrote:
> Not really, since they will be tied to the first process, which
> will timeout. You would need to fork off the processes.
> There are three ways to do this.
> 1. The way Urivan suggested, which is to store the messages on to the
> disk, and then have a cron job throttle the messages as needed be per
This requires cooperation of the host. It also requires turning on a
cron job as a TSR and then turning it off later.
> 2. The way that Chris Suggested, but using Postfix (or other MTA) with
> a filter to handle throttling.
Requires cooperation of the host and more.
> 3. When a set of message is to be sent, fork off a process, to do it.
Does this really close out the first process?
I also tried the following suggested by a friend:
close(STDin); #close I/O handles
print TEST scalar(localtime())."\n";
What this script does:
+ displays the message (good)
+ prints to xxx 30 seconds later (good)
+ the link in the message does not respond til after 30 seconds (bad)
+ if the operator hits the back button, it doesn't screwup anything (good)
This probably has the disadvantage of presenting the operator with a
The overarching question:
Is there a simple way to spawn a second process and close out the first
process as the second one runs?
perl perl perl
Joel Fentin tel: 760-749-8863
Biz Website: http://fentin.com
Personal Website: http://fentin.com/me
More information about the San-Diego-pm