I'd +1 Clint on this. I believe that the only right way to handle SIGHUP for process running in foreground is to terminate.
-- Best regards, Oleg Gelbukh On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Sean Dague's message of 2013-12-19 16:33:12 -0800: > > So a few people had been reporting recently that unstack no longer stops > > nova processes, which I only got around to looking at today. It turns > > out the new common.service stack from oslo takes SIGHUP and treats it as > > a restart. Which isn't wrong, but is new, and is incompatible with > > screen (the way we use it). Because we use -X stuff, the resulting -X > > quit sends SIGHUP to the child processes. > > > > So the question is, are we definitely in a state now where nova services > > can and do want to support SIGHUP as restart? > > > > If so, is there interest in being able to disable that behavior at start > > time, so we can continue with a screen based approach as well? > > > > If not, we'll need to figure out another way to approach the shutdown in > > devstack. Which is fine, just work that wasn't expected. > > > > Perhaps if the process is running in the foreground, as it does in > devstack, it should still terminate on SIGHUP rather than restart. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
