Using `message_queue` with `windows_shared_memory`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 28/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Stale
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- operating-systems
Research direction
Start by reading message_queue_t and its current shared_memory_object usage, then compare managed_open_or_create_impl with windows_shared_memory. Determine how the underlying memory abstraction could be selected and how destruction and message_queue_t::remove semantics should work; update the destructor documentation if the design is accepted.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
We're currently using message_queue on Windows, but want to avoid files being created on the user's filesystem (even in the application's config/cache directory). Moreover, we'd like to have the semantics of windows_shared_memory (mostly the destruction once all handles to the memory are closed).
Currently, message_queue uses shared_memory_object. Would it be possible for users to specify the underlying abstraction (e.g. message_queue_t<offset_ptr<void>, windows_shared_memory>)?
I experimented a bit by using managed_open_or_create_impl<windows_shared_memory, 0, false, false>, which worked fine for me (I might have missed some bugs as I don't know IPC too well). One downside is that message_queue_t::remove can't be used with windows_shared_memory, as it doesn't provide that functionality (the documentation for ~message_queue_t should be updated, too).
I'd be fine if this was done via a #define, but it would be nicer if an approach similar to the previously mentioned could be taken.
If this is something that could get included in the library, I'd be fine with implementing it.
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 185
- Forks
- 131
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from boostorg/interprocess
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 68/100
boostorg/interprocess#196 · 1 reaction ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 35/100
boostorg/interprocess#279 ·
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 35/100
boostorg/interprocess#274 · 1 comment ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 28/100
boostorg/interprocess#268 · 4 comments ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 35/100
boostorg/interprocess#262 · 2 comments ·
All issues in boostorg/interprocess
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
AXERA-TECH/ax-llm#77 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
games-on-whales/wolf#509 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
-
bug-unconfirmed
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100