On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Martin d'Anjou <martin.danjo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15-04-12 07:14 AM, Ole Tange wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Martin d'Anjou >> <martin.danjo...@gmail.com> wrote: : >>> Q2:
> In terms of a real life scenario, I can offer an overview of my workflow. > > Some processes take a long time to terminate from the point of view of GNU > Parallel, because from the time GNU Parallel issues the TERM signal and the > time GNU Parallel hears back from the processes, there could be an amount of > time longer than 200ms. For example, the current chain of command with > SIGTERM in my workflow is [long] : > The delay between sending SIGTERM and > hearing back from the child-most process can be more than 200ms. Can I ask you to measure it? If we are talking 1000 ms I will not see a big problem in changing the 200 ms to 1000 ms. > I hope this demonstrates that in some cases, extending the grace period > beyond 200ms benefits the user. It does; but it does not justify why it cannot be a (bigger) constant. /Ole
