Return-Path: william@bourbon.usc.edu Delivery-Date: Fri Sep 12 13:01:12 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on merlot.usc.edu X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (bourbon.usc.edu [128.125.9.75]) by merlot.usc.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8CK1CTD023935 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:01:12 -0700 Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bourbon.usc.edu (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8CK1DmM006946 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:01:13 -0700 Message-Id: <200809122001.m8CK1DmM006946@bourbon.usc.edu> To: cs551@merlot.usc.edu Subject: Re: Regarding shutting down of client process Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:01:13 -0700 From: Bill Cheng Someone wrote: > When you say, that child process should terminates as soon as possible when > an interrupt occurs, should the delays be set to zero or the child process > just does it normal work? I don't know what "delay" you are talking about! Does your client insert an artificial delay somewhere? -- Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu