Re: Use standard SIGHUP and SIGTERM handlers in autoprewarm module

On 2020/11/27 16:47, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:26 PM Fujii Masao
> <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> > > When I read the patch again, I found that, with the patch, the shutdown
>>> > > of worker_spi causes to report the following FATAL message.
>>> > >
>>> > > FATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command
>>> > >
>>> > > Isn't this message confusing because it's not a connection? If so,
>>> > > we need to update ProcessInterrupts() so that the proper message is
>>> > > reported like other bgworkers do.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > This is also true for all the bgworker that use the die() handler. How about doing it the way bgworker_die() does in ProcessInterrupts()? This would give meaningful information. Thoughts? If okay, I can make a separate patch.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Attaching the patch that improved the message for bg workers in ProcessInterrupts(). For instance, now it looks like *FATAL: terminating background worker "worker_spi" due to administrator command* or *FATAL: terminating background worker "parallel worker" due to administrator command *and so on for other bg workers.*
>>> *
>>>
>>> Please review the patch.
>>
>> Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.
>>
>
> Thanks!

Pushed. Thanks!

Since all the patches that proposed in this thread were committed,
I marked the CF entry as committed.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION