httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] screw up prefork even more
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2001 18:50:33 GMT
rbb@covalent.net writes:

> > > > I'm pretty sure that Ryan disagrees with the path I took for SIGHUP,
> > > > which is to kill everybody we can with the pod (since that is the most
> > > > clean and reliable mechanism we have) and let
> > > > ap_reclaim_child_processes() handle the stragglers.
> > >
> > > You can't use the pod to gracelessly shutdown the child processes.  It
> > > doesn't do that.  The pod will only work for graceful shutdowns.
> >
> > that's sort of what I said...  we start off like graceful (everybody
> > that dies from the pod dies cleanly) and then
> > ap_reclaim_child_processes() knocks everybody else out with SIGTERM
> 
> If we are going to end up sending the SIGTERM, then why bother with the
> pod at all?

well, that is what it comes down too

hopefully you'll find the current prefork in CVS acceptable, or at
least moving in the right direction

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
       http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
             Born in Roswell... married an alien...


Mime
View raw message