4This is an implementation of Cloud Haskell, as described in
5/Towards Haskell in the Cloud/ by Jeff Epstein, Andrew Black, and Simon
7<http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/parallel/>),
8although some of the details are different. The precise message passing
9semantics are based on /A unified semantics for future Erlang/ by Hans
10Svensson, Lars-Åke Fredlund and Clara Benac Earle.
12For a detailed description of the package and other reference materials,
13please see the distributed-process wiki page on github:
14<https://github.com/haskell-distributed/distributed-process/wiki>.
17module Control.Distributed.Process
25 , liftIO -- Reexported for convenience
40 -- * Unsafe messaging variants
45 -- * Advanced messaging
70 -- * Process management
79 , ProcessTerminationException(..)
80 , ProcessRegistrationException(..)
89 -- * Monitoring and linking
101 , MonitorRef -- opaque
102 , ProcessLinkException(..)
103 , NodeLinkException(..)
104 , PortLinkException(..)
105 , ProcessMonitorNotification(..)
106 , NodeMonitorNotification(..)
107 , PortMonitorNotification(..)
124 , registerRemoteAsync
125 , reregisterRemoteAsync
126 , unregisterRemoteAsync
131 -- * Exception handling
149 -- * Local versions of 'spawn'
157#if ! MIN_VERSION_base(4,6,0)
158import Prelude hiding (catch)
161import Control.Monad.IO.Class (liftIO)
162import Control.Applicative ((<$>))
163import Control.Monad.Reader (ask)
164import Control.Concurrent.MVar (newEmptyMVar, takeMVar, putMVar)
165import Control.Distributed.Static
171import Control.Distributed.Process.Internal.Types
176 , ProcessMonitorNotification(..)
177 , NodeMonitorNotification(..)
178 , PortMonitorNotification(..)
179 , ProcessLinkException(..)
180 , NodeLinkException(..)
181 , PortLinkException(..)
182 , ProcessRegistrationException(..)
191 , LocalProcess(processNode)
194import Control.Distributed.Process.Serializable (Serializable)
195import Control.Distributed.Process.Internal.Primitives
208 -- Advanced messaging
233 -- Process management
235 , ProcessTerminationException(..)
248 -- Monitoring and linking
268 , registerRemoteAsync
269 , reregisterRemoteAsync
270 , unregisterRemoteAsync
276 -- Exception handling
295import Control.Distributed.Process.Node (forkProcess)
296import Control.Distributed.Process.Internal.Spawn
297 ( -- Spawning Processes/Channels
308-- 1. 'send' never fails. If you want to know that the remote process received
309-- your message, you will need to send an explicit acknowledgement. If you
310-- want to know when the remote process failed, you will need to monitor
311-- that remote process.
313-- 2. 'send' may block (when the system TCP buffers are full, while we are
314-- trying to establish a connection to the remote endpoint, etc.) but its
315-- return does not imply that the remote process received the message (much
316-- less processed it). When 'send' targets a local process, it is dispatched
317-- via the node controller however, in which cases it will /not/ block. This
318-- isn't part of the semantics, so it should be ok. The ordering is maintained
319-- because the ctrlChannel still has FIFO semantics with regards interactions
320-- between two disparate forkIO threads.
322-- 3. Message delivery is reliable and ordered. That means that if process A
323-- sends messages m1, m2, m3 to process B, B will either arrive all three
324-- messages in order (m1, m2, m3) or a prefix thereof; messages will not be
325-- 'missing' (m1, m3) or reordered (m1, m3, m2)
327-- In order to guarantee (3), we stipulate that
329-- 3a. We do not garbage collect connections because Network.Transport provides
330-- ordering guarantees only *per connection*.
332-- 3b. Once a connection breaks, we have no way of knowing which messages
333-- arrived and which did not; hence, once a connection fails, we assume the
334-- remote process to be forever unreachable. Otherwise we might sent m1 and
335-- m2, get notified of the broken connection, reconnect, send m3, but only
338-- 3c. As a consequence of (3b) we should not reuse PIDs. If a process dies,
339-- we consider it forever unreachable. Hence, new processes should get new
340-- IDs or they too would be considered unreachable.
342-- Main reference for Cloud Haskell is
344-- [1] "Towards Haskell in the Cloud", Jeff Epstein, Andrew Black and Simon
346-- http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/simonpj/papers/parallel/remote.pdf
348-- The precise semantics for message passing is based on
350-- [2] "A Unified Semantics for Future Erlang", Hans Svensson, Lars-Ake Fredlund
351-- and Clara Benac Earle (not freely available online, unfortunately)
353-- Some pointers to related documentation about Erlang, for comparison and
356-- [3] "Programming Distributed Erlang Applications: Pitfalls and Recipes",
357-- Hans Svensson and Lars-Ake Fredlund
358-- http://man.lupaworld.com/content/develop/p37-svensson.pdf
359-- [4] The Erlang manual, sections "Message Sending" and "Send"
360-- http://www.erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/processes.html#id82409
361-- http://www.erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/expressions.html#send
362-- [5] Questions "Is the order of message reception guaranteed?" and
363-- "If I send a message, is it guaranteed to reach the receiver?" of
365-- http://www.erlang.org/faq/academic.html
366-- [6] "Delivery of Messages", post on erlang-questions
367-- http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2012-February/064767.html
369--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
370-- Local versions of spawn --
371--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
373-- | Spawn a process on the local node
374spawnLocal :: Process () -> Process ProcessId
376 node <- processNode <$> ask
377 liftIO $ forkProcess node proc
379-- | Create a new typed channel, spawn a process on the local node, passing it
380-- the receive port, and return the send port
381spawnChannelLocal :: Serializable a
382 => (ReceivePort a -> Process ())
383 -> Process (SendPort a)
384spawnChannelLocal proc = do
385 node <- processNode <$> ask
388 _ <- forkProcess node $ do
389 -- It is important that we allocate the new channel in the new process,
390 -- because otherwise it will be associated with the wrong process ID
391 (sport, rport) <- newChan
392 liftIO $ putMVar mvar sport
keysesc to close
- j k
- move down, up
- enter
- open
- esc
- back, or up a level
- 1 2 3 4
- readme, files, commits, refs
- /
- filter
- y
- copy the clone command
- c
- compare the chosen commit with another (or shift-click both)
- ?
- show or hide this list