I'm implementing a simple job scheduler, which spans a new process for every job to run. When a job exits, I'd like it to report the number of actions executed to the scheduler.
我正在实现一个简单的作业调度器，该调度器跨越每个要运行的作业的新进程。当一个作业退出时，我希望它向调度器报告执行的操作数。
The simplest way I could find, is to exit with the number of actions as a return code. The process would for example exit with return code 3 for "3 actions executed".
我能找到的最简单的方法是退出，以动作的数量作为返回代码。例如，该进程将退出并返回“执行的3个操作”的代码3。
But the standard (AFAIK) being to use the return code 0 when a process exited successfully, and any other value when there was en error, would this approach risk to create any problem?
但是，标准(AFAIK)是当一个进程成功退出时使用返回码0，当出现错误时，它会使用任何其他值，这种方法是否会产生任何问题?
Note: the child process is not an executable script, but a fork of the parent, so not accessible from the outside world.
注意:子进程不是可执行脚本，而是父进程的分支，因此不能从外部世界访问。
4 个解决方案
#1
2
What you are looking for is inter process communication - and there are plenty ways to do it:
你需要的是进程间的沟通——有很多方法可以做到:
- Sockets
- 套接字
- Shared memory
- 共享内存
- Pipes
- 管道
- Exclusive file descriptors (to some extend, rather go for something else if you can)
- 独占文件描述符
- ...
- …
Return convention changes are not something a regular programmer should dare to violate.
常规程序员不应该违反返回约定更改。
#2
1
The only risk is confusing a calling script. What you describe makes sense, since what you want really is the count. As Joe said, use negative values for failures, and you should consider including a --help option that explains the return values ... so you can figure out what this code is doing when you try to use it next month.
唯一的风险是混淆调用脚本。你所描述的是有道理的，因为你真正想要的是伯爵。正如Joe所说，对失败使用负值，您应该考虑包含一个-help选项来解释返回值……因此，当你下个月尝试使用这些代码时，你可以知道它们在做什么。
#3
0
I would use logs for it: log the number of actions executed to the scheduler. This way you can also log datetimes and other extra info.
我将为它使用日志:记录执行到调度器的操作数。通过这种方式，您还可以记录日期时间和其他额外的信息。
I would not change the return convention...
我不会更改返回约定……
#4
0
If the scheduler spans a child and you are writing that you could also open a pipe per child, or a named pipes or maybe unix domain sockets, and use that for inter process communication and writing the processed jobs there.
如果调度器跨越一个子进程，并且您正在编写，那么您也可以为每个子进程打开一个管道，或者一个命名管道，或者可能是unix域套接字，并使用它进行进程间通信并在那里编写处理后的作业。
I would stick with conventions, namely returning 0 for success, expecially if your program is visible/usable around by other people, or anyway document well those decisions.
我将坚持惯例，即为成功返回0，特别是如果您的程序被其他人看到/使用，或者无论如何要记录好这些决策。
Anyway apart from conventions there are also standards.
不管怎样，除了传统，还有标准。
#1
2
What you are looking for is inter process communication - and there are plenty ways to do it:
你需要的是进程间的沟通——有很多方法可以做到:
- Sockets
- 套接字
- Shared memory
- 共享内存
- Pipes
- 管道
- Exclusive file descriptors (to some extend, rather go for something else if you can)
- 独占文件描述符
- ...
- …
Return convention changes are not something a regular programmer should dare to violate.
常规程序员不应该违反返回约定更改。
#2
1
The only risk is confusing a calling script. What you describe makes sense, since what you want really is the count. As Joe said, use negative values for failures, and you should consider including a --help option that explains the return values ... so you can figure out what this code is doing when you try to use it next month.
唯一的风险是混淆调用脚本。你所描述的是有道理的，因为你真正想要的是伯爵。正如Joe所说，对失败使用负值，您应该考虑包含一个-help选项来解释返回值……因此，当你下个月尝试使用这些代码时，你可以知道它们在做什么。
#3
0
I would use logs for it: log the number of actions executed to the scheduler. This way you can also log datetimes and other extra info.
我将为它使用日志:记录执行到调度器的操作数。通过这种方式，您还可以记录日期时间和其他额外的信息。
I would not change the return convention...
我不会更改返回约定……
#4
0
If the scheduler spans a child and you are writing that you could also open a pipe per child, or a named pipes or maybe unix domain sockets, and use that for inter process communication and writing the processed jobs there.
如果调度器跨越一个子进程，并且您正在编写，那么您也可以为每个子进程打开一个管道，或者一个命名管道，或者可能是unix域套接字，并使用它进行进程间通信并在那里编写处理后的作业。
I would stick with conventions, namely returning 0 for success, expecially if your program is visible/usable around by other people, or anyway document well those decisions.
我将坚持惯例，即为成功返回0，特别是如果您的程序被其他人看到/使用，或者无论如何要记录好这些决策。
Anyway apart from conventions there are also standards.
不管怎样，除了传统，还有标准。