If no one has time to do it themselves, maybe I can put together a fund that folks can contribute to to get it done (I'd be able to do it then likely)?
On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 01:05 -0400, Jay Paroline wrote: > We'd also love to see this feature implemented. > > On 9/23/2010 1:46 PM, Chris McDonough wrote: > > I'd like this feature too, although I'm not in a position to write it > > myself soon. > > > > - C > > > > > > On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 10:28 -0700, Roger Hoover wrote: > >> We also want this feature. This could be implemented first as a > >> supervisord plugin and perhaps later incorporated into the core. > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Phillip Oldham > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We have N process of a wsgi app running behind nginx acting > >> as a > >> proxy. When we release an update, we either have to restart > >> each item > >> individually or issue a `restart wsgiapp:*` command. The > >> problem with > >> the latter is that it stops all the processes, *then* starts > >> them all. > >> This causes some requests to the app to fail. What would be > >> useful would > >> be to stop/start each process individually, so requests can > >> continue to > >> be served (nginx will simply fail over to the next backend > >> when one > >> doesn't respond) and will allow us to keep a reasonable > >> "uptime". > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Supervisor-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Supervisor-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Supervisor-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users > _______________________________________________ Supervisor-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users
