On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 08:03:51PM +0200, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 27.09.2010 19:19, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > >On Monday 27 September 2010, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >>>BTW, it is not that obvious that the shm is supposed to be > >>>cleaned up and re-created on graceful restarts. This should be > >>>documented in the code. > >>> > >>> > >> > >>That's an interesting point. I always assumed that it should be, > >>since one use for it would be as a scoreboard-like replacement > >>(and the pain for the scoreboard is that it's a set size)... > >>But I can also see reasons for it to NOT be cleaned/recreated... > >>How best to handle that?? > > > >If it would be used for e.g. storing mod_proxy_balancer's worker > >configuration/state, one would want the data to survive a graceful > >restart, wouldn't one? But from a consumer's perspective, it doesn't > >matter if this achieved by not destroying the shm segment or by saving > >the data to disk and reloading it after recreating the shm segment. > >So it seems to me that the current functionality is enough. > > So if a graceful restart is initiated, will old children working on > requests still be able to use the old shm segment, i.e. will it be > destroyed after the last old child dies or earlier? >
The cleanup is when the config pool is cleaned up, at which point there are no more consumers of that pool so we're safe. -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [email protected] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~ John Adams
