On a related note, documentation says that supervisord relies on SIGCHLD to be notified of a monitored process termination: http://supervisord.org/subprocess.html
However, in the code I see that SIGCHLD is swallowed with a mere log message, while the actual mechanism seems to rely on a file descriptor activity when the pipe connected to stdout of a child process closes. Which way is really in use? In either case, I believe it is next to impossible to take ownership of monitoring processes that were not started by the current instance of supervisord. Regards, /Sergey On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Sergey Maslyakov <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you all for the answers! Indeed, there is no code in the start up > sequence that could find "stale" children and bestow the monitoring on them. > > > /Sergey > > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Dustin Oprea <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Roger Hoover <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> If supervisor dies, I think it's child processes will be orphaned and >>> need to be killed manually. A new instance of supervisord will spawn a new >>> set of children. >>> >>> >> 1+ >> >> >> >> Dustin >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Supervisor-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Supervisor-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users
