From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 16 21:27:15 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107DE106566C; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:27:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (ZIM.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28808FC18; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:27:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m6GL36Wb020806; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:03:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m6GL36PO020805; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:03:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:03:06 -0400 From: David Schultz To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20080716210306.GA20758@zim.MIT.EDU> Mail-Followup-To: Doug Barton , Dan Nelson , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <487E533F.7050303@FreeBSD.org> <20080716201819.GB19044@dan.emsphone.com> <487E5DCD.3010206@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <487E5DCD.3010206@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, Dan Nelson Subject: Re: Heads Up: shutdown keyword added to 34 rc.d scripts. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:27:15 -0000 On Wed, Jul 16, 2008, Doug Barton wrote: > Dan Nelson wrote: > >Adding > >shutdown to things like amd, mountd, moused, etc. simply forces what > >would be done in init's final SIGTERM sweep to be done sequentially > >instead of in parallel. > > The ability to do things sequentially is a key benefit of the rc.d > system. The fact that we have not been taking full advantage of that > to date is (once again IMO) an oversight. A niftier trick would be to actually denote the shutdown dependencies between apps. Then SIGTERM (or whatever the appropriate shutdown operation is) can happen in parallel as much as possible, without accidentally shutting down a service before dependent services have had a chance to clean up. There's probably not as many interesting deps for shutdown as there are for startup...