pure transit server

[bill davidsen]

In article <20010201222529.A10733 at opentransit.net> Fabien Tassin wrote:

| According to Russ Allbery:
| > 
| > BTW, if you do write a pure transit server, I for one would be happy to
| > see about having it be part of the INN package....
| 
| I've converted quite easily my server to be multi-threaded. Lets call this
| beast "inntd" for InterNetNews Transit(er?) daemon. I wanted to directly
| use INN history and CNFS code but I don't think they are thread-safe.
| I've first looked at the CNFS code but, ootch, how dense and fuzzy ! APIs over
| APIs, conf files over conf files. I'm currently looking at the dbz code
| but like CNFS and anything that can be useful for me, it is too tied
| to libinn, autoconf and the like. Don't know what it is better, fighting
| with current code or rewriting everything from scratch. I want to avoid
| to fork a new project but it is probably simpler. Ideas ?
| 
| About threading, I'm using Linux pthreads. I try to write portable code
| (I'm not using autoconf yet) but threads are always a problem.
| Thoughts ?

  We sort of need this yesterday, certainly by the end of the week;-)

  I'll be glad to look at the design, although that seems pretty much
done, if you're using the listeners=>queue=>feeders model you posted. I
can test, and if there are bits to be done, as long as we can agree on
the spec I'd be glad to crank out some of those.

  I have limited time this month, due to having a bunch of projects all
coming up and getting an article proposal accepted with a short
deadline. But I'm not totally out of time, so let me know what could be
useful. After that I'm much less busy (a relative thing).

  Fork the project, the features would not blend well in terms of
complexity, I'm afraid.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.