On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:09:30AM -0700, Jordan Brown wrote: > Joe Blount wrote: > > I have a situation where, to my knowledge, SMF dependencies alone > > cannot ensure the proper shutdown sequence during a shutdown. > > It seems like you are describing precisely a dependency problem, and not > an unreasonable one, so either there's a way to map it into dependencies > or there should be. > > > The ADM event manager service need to hang around until after > > unmounts of the file systems it manages. But unmounts are not > > controlled by an SMF service. > > That seems to be the key. Why aren't unmounts controlled by an SMF > service? Why doesn't it work to make them controlled by an SMF service, > and make that SMF service depend on your event manager service?
I don't think that's necessarily the answer. What happens then when SMF stops the service that would do those unmounts in its stop method? The same problem will crop up! I think it may be necessary to have a way to tell SMF that a service's stop method must not time out. Actually, there is a way to do that: with the timeout_seconds attribute of exec_method. Does svc.startd honor that attribute of stop methods? Nico --
