> No need for _any_ excuses! I'm sorry if I came across like pointing > fingers or anything. Sometimes, this stuff has to be done in order to > learn how to do it better. Some problems don't reveal themselves at > first. So really, there is no problem! All the hard work that has > been > done was necessary, even if some of it gets replaced later. OK. :) At the same time, it's frustrating to know that something that has been rewritten twice now needs *another* rewrite. At least this time it should be the right one. > > AFAICT, the message format is really what is at issue and the > > reason > > for all the instability. > > Yes, I'm also not against using the port link style messaging. I > would > only like to introduce ways into the implementation that make it very > error resistent. The app_server design will have to hold up against > running for at least months straight without a restart. So in the > end, > every part of the server needs to have that level of robustness. In > my > original mail, I just ment to draw some attention to this problem > with > the fragility in the current messaging implementation. I just wanted > to > hear what other like you have to say about this. At this point, I'd simply like to get the thing building on my machine, but I know what you mean. :) --DW