Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:09:56 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Heads Up: shutdown keyword added to 34 rc.d scripts. Message-ID: <487E71B4.305@andric.com> In-Reply-To: <20080716210306.GA20758@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <487E533F.7050303@FreeBSD.org> <20080716201819.GB19044@dan.emsphone.com> <487E5DCD.3010206@FreeBSD.org> <20080716210306.GA20758@zim.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2008-07-16 23:03, David Schultz wrote: > 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... Possibly just the "reverse" of the startup deps? For example, if baz is dependent on foo and bar, the startup order is: 1. foo & bar (possibly parallel) 2. baz at shutdown, we'd get the reverse: 1. baz 2. foo & bar (possibly parallel) However, this may not be so easy for the total dependency graph of everything under /etc/rc.d (not to forget /usr/local/etc/rc.d). ;)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?487E71B4.305>