Re: Big strings => panic

• Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 18:41:32 PDT
• From:
  tom@mvision.com (Tom Ritchford)
• Reply-To:
  tom@mvision.com
• Cc: tom@tom.eng.mvision.com
• In-Reply-To: <96Apr19.155350pdt.19565@silk.parc.xerox.com> (message from Pavel Curtis on Fri, 19 Apr 1996 15:53:49 PDT)

Pavel "MOO Deity" Curtis writes:
>Matthew Sanderson writes:
>> Your average MOO runs only a few utility tasks in my experience... nothing
>> fatal if killed. Of course, someone'll prove me wrong here...
>
>LambdaMOO has literally hundreds of background tasks at any given time, many of
>which are carefully updating important data structures implementing LambdaMOO's
>governmental systems.  Randomly killing tasks would cause *more* damage than
>crashing, since it would leave the DB in an effectively inconsistent state.
[snip]

An interesting idea just came to me.  Why not just restrict
the sizes of all data structures that are run by tasks that
don't have wizard perms?

Then important maintenance tasks can still continue but
programmers won't so easily be able to cause a panic and
a shutdown.

    /t

Tom Ritchford     tom@mvision.com, tom@weirdos.com

Verge's "Little Idiot" -- Music for the mentally peculiar.
1-800-WEIRDOS           http://www.fly.net/~verge

• Re: Big strings => panic
• From: Christopher Unkel <cunkel@us.itd.umich.edu>

• Re: Big strings => panic
• From: Pavel Curtis <pavel@parc.xerox.com>

• Prev: Re: Big strings => panic
• Next: Re: Big strings => panic
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows