[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: About to commit removal of global_backendsync code and have one more enhancement

On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Randy Kunkee wrote:

> I have one more enhancement I'd like to offer.  This is a simple change
> to allow a signal to the slapd process to restart the server using the
> same arguments it was called with in the first place.  I use this to
> restart the version 1.2.x slapd process in order to get a fresh slapd
> running nightly.

Are you talking about a signal handler than runs exec()?  Or how are you
planning to implement this?  I'm wondering what the advantage is over
having a "restart" option in an rc script that sends SIGINT to the running
server and then starts a new one.

> By the way, the signal I have been using is "SIGQUIT" which was not my
> first choice, but SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2, SIGHUP, SIGINT, SIGTERM are all
> taken.  So it will be SIGQUIT, unless somebody has a better suggestion.

If you're willing to wander off from the tourist trap signals, there is
SIGPWR on Solaris, Linux, et al.  I just glanced through the signal.h
files and that seemed to fit what you're doing -- "power cycling" the
slapd process. Hardcore compliance people will no doubt blanche at the

-Mark Adamson
 Carnegie Mellon