http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9005
--- Comment #6 from Paul Poulain <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > This patch can solve a bugguy behaviour at the price of loosing a very > > interesting cache feature. > > No, it doesn't. It solves a major bug with no side-effects for systems that > aren't affected by the bug. It is 100% opt-in. I feel that libraries that are changing sysprefs *sometimes* will complain. And we must find a generic way to solve the "rare change of datas", or we won't be able to add more caching. For example, we could store in a global/"static" variable the issuingrules, to avoid reading them on each checkin. But if they are changed, how the librarian administrator will be able to propagate it on Plack ? investigating the documentation, I find : https://github.com/miyagawa/Starman that says : Starman is a PSGI perl web server that has unique features such as: Signals Supports "HUP" for graceful worker restarts, and "TTIN"/"TTOU" to dynamically increase or decrease the number of worker processes, as well as "QUIT" to gracefully shutdown the worker processes. wouldn't a page/link in the admin section that "reload" the server at user request be useful ? > > What could be the long-term one ? > > Is there a proper way to tell Plack that he must restart all his childs ? > > This seems like a bad idea from a security standpoint. Why is it a bad idea ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
