On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 04:24:00PM EST, Assaf Muller wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Sean M. Collins <s...@coreitpro.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I started poking a bit at https://bugs.launchpad.net/devstack/+bug/1535661 > > > > We have radvd processes that the l3 agent launches, and if the l3 agent > > is terminated these radvd processes continue to run. I think we should > > probably terminate them when the l3 agent is terminated, like if we are > > in DevStack and doing an unstack.sh[1]. There's a fix on the DevStack > > side but I'm waffling a bit on if it's the right thing to do or not[2]. > > > > The only concern I have is if there are situations where the l3 agent > > terminates, but we don't want data plane disruption. For example, if > > something goes wrong and the L3 agent dies, if the OS will be sending a > > SIGABRT (which my WIP patch doesn't catch[3] and radvd would continue to > > run) or if a > > SIGTERM is issued, or worse, an OOM event occurs (I think thats a > > SIGTERM too?) and you get an outage. > > RDO systemd init script for the L3 agent will send a signal 15 when > 'systemctl restart neutron-l3-agent' is executed. I assume > Debian/Ubuntu do the same. It is imperative that agent restarts do not > cause data plane interruption. This has been the case for the L3 agent
But wouldn't it really be wiser to use SIGHUP to communicate the intent to restart a process? -- Sean M. Collins __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev