httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Woolley <jwool...@virginia.edu>
Subject Re: [PATCH] get worker to wait for workers to exit even for graceless
Date Wed, 01 May 2002 18:57:47 GMT
On 1 May 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:

> > In any case, +1 on the patch.  Worker won't be perfect, but at least
> > it will be better than 2.0.35.
>
> I just committed it.  I'd love to get some feedback from other Linux
> users before a roll, though.


It shuts down, but ouch, is it nasty:

[Wed May 01 14:52:26 2002] [warn] child process 11253 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:26 2002] [warn] child process 11254 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:26 2002] [warn] child process 11253 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:26 2002] [warn] child process 11254 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:28 2002] [warn] child process 11253 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:28 2002] [warn] child process 11254 still did not exit,
sending a SIGTERM
[Wed May 01 14:52:32 2002] [error] child process 11253 still did not exit,
sending a SIGKILL
[Wed May 01 14:52:32 2002] [error] child process 11254 still did not exit,
sending a SIGKILL
[Wed May 01 14:52:49 2002] [notice] caught SIGTERM, shutting down

Note: as soon as I told it to stop, my big download *did* get stopped.
But the process just sat there until it got the SIGKILL, at which point it
was a zombie until the parent shut down a few seconds later.

:-/

--Cliff

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA



Mime
View raw message