httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Richards <p.richa...@elsevier.co.uk>
Subject Re: [PATCH] revised death wish on HUP patch
Date Mon, 17 Feb 1997 11:10:34 GMT
Paul Sutton <paul@ukweb.com> writes:

> On 14 Feb 1997, Paul Richards wrote:
> > When I looked at the problem with signal handling a few months ago I
> > thought I commented on the fact that the children are *not* passed a
> > signal at all. They are allowed to die naturally when they finish
> > processing the request. Are we changing that model? I've been trying to
> > catch up on two weeks mail (annual accounts audit and Phd viva both the
> > same week!) so I've skimmed quite a lot recently and might not be up to
> > speed on the problem. Someone want to give me a quick summary?
> 
> Erm, I thought Apache had always sent the children HUPs to kill em
> immediately, which was the reason why graceful restarts are needed -- to
> let transfers in progress finish. 

I was confused. It was SIGUSR1 that I was looking at a few months ago
not SIGHUP.

-- 
  Dr Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd.  (Netcraft Ltd. contractor)
  Elsevier Science TIS online journal project.
  Email: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk
  Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155

Mime
View raw message