Return-Path: william@bourbon.usc.edu
Delivery-Date: Sat Oct 18 14:43:16 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 m9ILhFGA018034
	for <cs551@merlot.usc.edu>; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:43:15 -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 m9ILq2a9024759
	for <cs551@merlot>; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:52:02 -0700
Message-Id: <200810182152.m9ILq2a9024759@bourbon.usc.edu>
To: cs551@merlot.usc.edu
Subject: Re: proj questions
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:52:01 -0700
From: Bill Cheng <william@bourbon.usc.edu>

Someone wrote:

  > I have 2 questions:
  > 
  > Firstly, If in the startup.ini file, InitNeighbors is less than
  > MinNeighbors, a joining node will go in an infinite loop. should we
  > check this while parsing the init file and display an error, or assume
  > this condition will never occur.

If this condition occurs, going into an infinite loop would
be a correct behavior.  But, if you want to check for this
and report it and quit, that would be fine too.

  > Secondly, do the log entries have to be sorted on time. since things
  > happen so fast (like in join or status) sometimes more than 2 threads
  > wait on the mutex to write to the file and since when multiple threads
  > are waiting for a mutex, the order of acquisition is undefined we
  > might see a send entry before a receive entry, though they have the
  > correct times.
  > 
  > eg.
  > 
  > s 1224352227.708 xxxxxxxxxx JNRS xxxxxxxx
  > r 1224352227.707 xxxxxxxxxx JNRQ xxxxxxxx
  > 
  > is it ok to have such an o/p.

Yes!  You are logging the time when an event happen.
It's reasonable that this happens.
--
Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu <URL:http://merlot.usc.edu/william/usc/>