/ Zope / Apsis / Pound Mailing List / Archive / 2003 / 2003-12 / Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?

[ << ] [ >> ]

[ keepalive problems? / Attila Nagy ... ] [ Re: [Zope] kill LONG request and manage_main DoS? ... ]

Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?
Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman(at)debian.org>
2003-12-08 17:13:47 [ FULL ]
Every other piece of software that I can think of, or find running on
one of my machines, that writes its pid to a file in /var/run writes
the pid of its "master process" to /var/run/something.pid, with the
idea that you can then easily signal that master process by doing (for

kill -HUP `cat /var/run/something.pid`

Pound, however, adds the pid onto the end of the filename.

Is there any particular benefit being derived from using this unusual
convention?  It seems to me to make the whole idea of writing the file
much less useful.


Re: Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?
Robert Segall <roseg(at)apsis.ch>
2003-12-08 18:43:37 [ FULL ]
On Monday 08 December 2003 17:13, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:[...]

It was meant to support installations where you have more than one instance of 
Pound running (for example to support virtual hosts, separate filtering for 
SSL/non-SSL connections, etc).[...]

Re: Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?
Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman(at)debian.org>
2003-12-08 21:11:00 [ FULL ]
Robert Segall <roseg(at)apsis.ch> writes:[...]

I had not thought about the issue of having multiple instances of
Pound running at once.

However, it is my perception that most other packages give you the
option to override the location of the pid file in a configuration
file, thereby allowing the admin to establish unique pid files with
known names for different instances.

Would you consider a patch that allowed this?


Re: Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?
"Simon Matter" <simon.matter(at)ch.sauter-bc.com>
2003-12-09 08:02:35 [ FULL ]
> Robert Segall <roseg(at)apsis.ch> writes:[...][...]

I'd like to see this too.


Re: Why /var/run/pound_pid.$$?
Freya Editor <editor(at)swiss-freya.com>
2003-12-09 09:46:44 [ FULL ]
On Monday 08 December 2003 21:11, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:[...]

In general yes. I suggest however that you wait a bit with it - we are working 
on 2.0, which will have a very different config file syntax. We'll keep the 
list posted...[...]