On 02/13/2014 03:32 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote: > tor 2014-02-13 klockan 09:43 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov: > >> I am not sure which approach is the best, but I am sure we need to >> clearly define and document the new semantics to avoid repeating -N >> problems which were caused primarily by folks (including myself) >> interpreting what -N means differently and changing the code according >> to their own misguided interpretation. >> >> For example, we can define the following three modes: >> >> "daemon" -- Master process forks and uses setsid (what else?). No other >> effects on Squid. For example, SMP works by forking kid processes as >> needed. Meant for stand-alone execution. This is the default (enabled >> when no related command line options are given). > > yes. > >> "no daemon" -- "Daemonization" steps listed in the above paragraph are >> disabled. Thus, the master process does not fork and does not use setsid >> (what else?). No other effects on Squid. For example, SMP works by >> forking kid processes as needed. Meant for systemd and such. > > In my mind this is what -N is meant to be.
I agree now, but I did not realize that when the SMP code was written, unfortunately. >> "no forking" -- Squid runs a single Squid process, which works both as a >> master process and the only worker process. No kid processes, no SMP. >> Meant for debugging and triage. > > Exactly. "no forking" is more of a debug mode. Maybe time to add a > --debug=... option to set various debug flags? > > --debug=nofork > > And also merge the -X flag into this. No objections from me, especially if -X will be deprecated or removed during this change. Alternatively, we can extend the -X option itself: -X # just like it is now, no changes -X nofork -X monolith # I hate negative names like nofork :-) -X ALL,9 # because the default ALL,7 us not always enough. Thank you, Alex.
