[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Manual: why not restart service over killing the process
From: |
Christopher Baines |
Subject: |
Re: Manual: why not restart service over killing the process |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Nov 2020 15:44:15 +0000 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 27.1 |
EuAndreh <eu@euandre.org> writes:
> Hi!
>
> The manual suggests a deploy-hook for the certbot-service-type that
> looks like this:
>
> (define %nginx-deploy-hook
> (program-file
> "nginx-deploy-hook"
> #~(let ((pid (call-with-input-file "/var/run/nginx/pid" read)))
> (kill pid SIGHUP))))
>
> Instead of requiring the deploy-hook to know the path of the PID file,
> why not restart the Shepherd service instead? Something like this:
>
> (define %nginx-deploy-hook
> (program-file
> "nginx-deploy-hook"
> (with-imported-modules '((gnu services herd))
> #~(begin
> (use-modules (gnu services herd))
> (restart-service 'nginx)))))
>
> If I understood correctly, those would result in equivalent outcomes,
> and I tend to find the latter a more elegant approach. It is a bit
> longer, but I like more restarting the service rather than killing the
> process. Is there any downside I'm missing?
You're sort of right, but you've got the downsides the wrong way around.
The key bit with the kill call is the SIGHUP but, not that it's not
SIGKILL. The current situation won't kill the NGinx process, but instead
just get it to reload the certificate (at least that's the intention).
The restart action would "kill" the process, in that it would send it
SIGTERM and the the shepherd would start a new NGinx process, and this
has the potential of interrupting whatever is using NGinx.
Does that make sense?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature