I take your answer as a polite confirmation that I am the only one to make
that mistake :-)
Well, this seems to be the case. Now that I know the problem cause, this
*is* obvious.
Still, the guide doesn't clear things IMHO for one under the same weird
false assumption that I had: "but the parent does not exit. Instead, the
parent re-reads its configuration files, spawns a new set of child processes
and continues to serve requests. It is almost equivalent to stopping and
then restarting the server. " It seems a subtle point indeed - that although
the libperl.so is external, it has already been mapped into the core back at
the runtime loader stage, and will never be reloaded. Until I asked myself
this question in this form (what exactly happens with the apache core and
why isn't the module reloaded?) I didn't get it.
I wonder why I was so sure that apache re-exec's itself. I am sure I saw it
in some public domain server after our homegrown webserver implementation
had done it that way, some 6 years ago. Was it cern httpd then, rather than
ncsa/apache? Well, I could also notice there is no "-listen-fd 4" or smth.
argument in the respawned httpd process cmdline, to tell the restarting
process where to take the listening socket... I like this technique because
it ensures there is no resource leak (other than, possibly, forgotten open
fds) on restart. Do you know if really many people suffer from the memory
leaks you mention at the link you gave? Should I patch apache so it has such
restart semantics in addition to (as another sighandler?
configurable?)/instead the current HUP behaviour? I mean, will such patch be
really useful for someone?
Vassilii
-----Original Message-----
From: Stas Bekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 11:50 AM
To: Khachaturov, Vassilii
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Trouble with AxKit at runtime - XML parsing stage
> Stas: maybe you could add a small section to your Guide elaborating on
> dependencies of things and what has to be remade when things are upgraded?
> (Or I am the only one to make such stupid mistake?)
Well, it's documentated:
http://perl.apache.org/guide/control.html#Restarting_Techniques
Of course you cannot send a process the HUP signal and expect it to fully
stop and re-start, unless you know that it does that.
Isn't it obvious that when you upgrade some binary you should quit the
program that's depending on it and restart it?
