[bf1942] Map change process leak with 1.6rc2

[Steven Hartland]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "AthlonRob" <AthlonRob at axpr.net>

> Good luck with that....

No luck needed I have total faith in Andreas and his team they have
done us prowd in the past and I dont antisipate this will change :)

> Again, I don't know exactly how to do this under Windows, but doing that
> under Linux is all fairly straightforward.  Many GNU utilities have been
> ported over to Windows, mostly via CYGWIN...
>
> Netstat tells you what processes are bound to what ports.  ps can tell
> you what command lines what processes are using.  cut and grep solve a
> few more problems.  I don't see the lack of reliability in there... then
> again, with the lack of command line utilites available for Windows...
> maybe the CYGWIN tools just won't work for you?


I know the tools as we do infact run them as I said our script is a little
more than the basic script I originally posted. Which does include
monitoring process by tree hyerarchy but this is not possible
in this case due to the way the new process is created, it becomes
ppid = 0. cygwin ps etc dont report win32 processes so thats not
an option and there is no netstat for cygwin :(
Belive me if I could come up with a 100% workaround I would
but I dont believe its possible without some really nasty process
monitor hacking as none of the standard tools i.e. cygwin ps or
sysinternals pslist are capable of providing the information required.

> It wasn't meant to much as a Linux vs Win32 argument.  I think we can
> all agree at the very least Windows eats many more CPU cycles than Linux
> when you're talking about dedicated servers, if for no other reason than
> because it requires the big GUI.

Trust me I would love to be able to run all our servers on linux, FreeBSD
infact as linux is very bleading edge and has a number of SMP issues. But
being a hosting company that support multiple games on multiple platforms
some of our customers either insist/prefer/require win32 and we do our
best to provide.

> I can't imagine if you were terribly concerned about grep'ing for a few
> PIDs eating CPU cycles that you would *not* be concerned about the load
> the GUI puts on your CPU is all.

Although greping is very low CPU load everything adds up but in this
case is a none option from what I can see so not really an issue.

Thanks for feedback though always useful to have peps run over the
possibilities just in case you've missed them :)

    Steve / K

================================================
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. 

In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137
or return the E.mail to postmaster at multiplay.co.uk.