On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 05:42:33PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > But the parent dying doesn't imply the child processes also kicking > the bucket (as we've seen).
And that's rather easy to do, and IMHO it should be added to the children. (that was what I said about kill(getppid(),0) or getppid() being 1). > So that means the cronjob needs to check > for the valid parent, and if not, selectively kill the child processes > and then restart apache. That selective kill isn't trivial (we > *still* don't do apachectl right) due to the various 'ps' versions > and executable names. Exactly. That's another reason why I am against it. > It's "easier" (as far as having access to the > information) if we have an in-process daemon with access to the child > PIDs. No. The child processes do their request loop. Why shouldn't they check for the existence of the parent once per loop? With that assumption, a cron job doing: > kill -0 `cat httpd-2.0/logs/httpd.pid` || httpd-2.0/sbin/apachectl start is enough. > Assuming that the kids die when the parent does, the above makes sense > but I thought the main issue was whether they should or should not. IMO they definitely should (someone was against it, I am totally FOR it). > If they do, it's trivial, if not, it's not. Exactly. Martin -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fujitsu Siemens Fon: +49-89-636-46021, FAX: +49-89-636-47655 | 81730 Munich, Germany
