Re: Many instances of LDM on the same machine

• To: Daniel.Lemay@xxxxxxxx (Lemay, Daniel [CMC])
• Subject: Re: Many instances of LDM on the same machine
• From: David Knight <knight@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 23:09:49 +0000 (GMT)

Oh well, it was a thought. One other one. The default
ldm port is 388. Perhaps you can start different ldm
processes listening on different ports. Sorry don't
know if this is supported or not. I don't see
how else you could determin that the correct
ldm proccess is answering the request - but I'm no expert...
Sounds to me like either you, or your clients, are
going to have to be a little flexible. How many
different variations of the same feed do you need?
Good luck,
David

> David,
> 
> The problem is that I cannot put the files into two differents FEED types.
> It is one of the constraints of the problem (Many different clients want
> differents products, but each client want them tagged with the same FEED
> type).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Daniel
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Knight [mailto:knight@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> > Sent: 21 November, 2003 17:36
> > To: Daniel.Lemay@xxxxxxxx
> > Cc: steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Many instances of LDM on the same machine
> > 
> > 
> > I see two options (since you don't want to use two machines). 
> > If you insert the products into the queue originally, then 
> > you could insert each set of data as a seperate feedtype. If 
> > this is an existing feed, that you need to split up, then you 
> > could put a matching pattern in your pqact.conf and reinsert 
> > the product into the queue using pqinsert and specifying a 
> > different feedtype. Then just allow by feedtypes as usual. 
> > Should work, haven't tried it. David
> > 
> > > It's really that they  SHOULDN'T get any data that is not 
> > intended to 
> > > them.
> > > 
> > > Daniel
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Steve Emmerson [mailto:steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: 21 November, 2003 17:07
> > > > To: Lemay,Daniel [CMC]
> > > > Cc: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: Many instances of LDM on the same machine 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Daniel,
> > > > 
> > > > >Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:45:47 -0500
> > > > >From: "Lemay,Daniel [CMC]" <Daniel.Lemay@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > >To: "'Steve Emmerson'" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >Subject: RE: Many instances of LDM on the same machine
> > > > 
> > > > The above message contained the following:
> > > > 
> > > > > Suppose that I'm in the following situation:
> > > > ...
> > > > > -I want to be sure that my "clients" can only obtain the files 
> > > > > that
> > > > > are intend for them. I don't want to rely on the fact they 
> > > > will choose
> > > > > themselves the subset of the feed I allow them. I know that
> > > > I cannot
> > > > > insert a regular expression in my ALLOW statement to 
> > restrict what
> > > > > files they will have access.
> > > > 
> > > > That's an interesting situation (and one that I haven't 
> > considered).
> > > > 
> > > > Is it the case that each downstream site SHOULDN'T get the
> > > > other's data or that such feed-requests would merely be 
> > inefficient?
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Steve Emmerson
> > > > 
> > 

• References:
  • RE: Many instances of LDM on the same machine
    • From: Lemay,Daniel [CMC]