[erlang-questions] Fishing for best practices: distributed twin processes!

Roberto Ostinelli roberto@REDACTED
Sat Sep 15 03:46:23 CEST 2012

hello Michael,

you're assuming right (separate VM), I'm familiar with links and monitors,
thank you. However I doubt that any message is sent from a dying process if
the VM on which it runs actually blows up. That was my point.


On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Michael Truog <mjtruog@REDACTED> wrote:

> **
> Assuming you have the 2 layers in separate Erlang VMs.  You can have the
> Erlang VMs connected with distributed Erlang, and have the twin processes
> monitoring each other.  If you wanted a simple process death if either
> died, you could consider using a link instead of 2 monitors.  However, that
> seems like the simplest solution, to avoid unnecessary complexity.  You
> might find strangeness if you start not using the default net tick time
> (i.e., with a process link inbetween nodes), with distributed Erlang, but
> you probably know it is best to not play with that.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120914/2e561cab/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list