Re: [SNG-chat] Modules idea...

[Lucas N. <lu...@lu...>]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 09:12:15AM -0500, Daniel Engel <da...@ze...> wrote:
> I've been thinking about modules lately...
> 
>    One of the reasons I didn't like NeoStats module handling,
>    is that if a module segfauls, the entire service process
>    comes down. One solution would be to put every module on 
>    their own threads, but I thought... 

Mmmh I'm not sure this is a good idea.
It would mean that modules would communicate with the core through
sockets. we would have to define a protocol, and encode/decode
messages. this might cause performance problems (and performance seems
to be a problem for many people here).
Java, if chosen, would provide a nice solution : many errors are catched
by exceptions.

I'm not sure we need real "modules" anyway. Modules is a way to
circumevent the lack of object oriented things in classic languages like
C. I think the only point is : Can a third party code additionnal
classes for services without changing anything in the services code ? If
we can reach this point, this would be enough modularity for me.

For the backup problem, I don't think a backup system is needed for such
software crashes. The only times when I have needed backup services were
due to connection or hardware problems where the services were hosted.
And, with such problems, backup services should be started by hand
anyway. The only problem is to make databases be up to date on the
backup machine. This can be done by replication of the SQL databases, or
rsync. 

lucas