From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/785 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard A Downing FBCS CITP Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: rpc.nfsd, rpc.mountd Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 15:43:26 +0100 Message-ID: <427B828E.8080501@109bean.org.uk> References: <200502191502.39778.harmend@planet.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1115390278 472 80.91.229.2 (6 May 2005 14:37:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 14:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: supervision-return-1021-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Fri May 06 16:37:53 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14]) by ciao.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DU3wb-0001U6-Ro for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Fri, 06 May 2005 16:36:45 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 16671 invoked by uid 76); 6 May 2005 14:43:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: Original-Received: (qmail 16665 invoked from network); 6 May 2005 14:43:56 -0000 X-AV-Scanned: yes 102a6b5f928437d6c4cc08d9e5917388 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050324) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Original-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org In-Reply-To: <200502191502.39778.harmend@planet.nl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:785 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:785 H.M. Dijkstra wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I'm an enthuisast runit user, all services I had planned to run under runit > are running well. However I'm in need for some clarification on the behaviour > of rpc.nfsd and all the other rpc.* which are part of the nfs-utils package. > I observe the following: > > First I link in rpc.statd, which runs fine and stays 'parked' under runsv. > Then > I start rpc.mountd, a run script similar to yours on your site, section > runscripts. Being completely hooked on the idea of having *all* processes > started by runit monitored by runit I see rpc.mountd remaining 'parked' under > runit, but the 8 threads of nfsd and 1 thread of lockd jumped ship and are 'on > their own' sitting in the root process tree. Ok, I might sound a nit esoteric > so > I'll provide an example here: > > --------example---------- > 1738 ? S 0:00 \_ runsv nfs.mountd > 2656 ? S 0:00 | \_ /command/svlogd -tt > /var/log/supervise/nfs.mountd > 2671 ? S 0:00 | \_ /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd -F --no-nfs-version 2 > --nfs-version 3 > 1739 ? S 0:00 \_ runsv nfs.statd > 2607 ? S 0:00 | \_ /command/svlogd -tt > /var/log/supervise/nfs.statd > 2622 ? S 0:00 | \_ /sbin/rpc.statd -F > 1740 ? S 0:00 \_ runsv portmap > 1744 ? S 0:00 | \_ /command/svlogd > -tt /var/log/supervise/portmap > 1826 ? S 0:00 | \_ /sbin/portmap -d > 1742 ? S 0:00 \_ runsv crond > 1753 ? S 0:00 \_ /command/svlogd -tt /var/log/supervise/crond > 2578 ? S 0:00 \_ crond -d1 -l10 > 2683 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2684 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2685 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2686 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2687 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2688 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2689 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2690 ? S 0:00 [nfsd] > 2691 ? S 0:00 [lockd] > --------example---------- > > I don't mind this per se, because I know these nfsd en lockd threads are > kernelspace processes and cannot be controlled by your runit for that > particular > reason and even if it could I suppose this would mean a too much of burden to > control by means of context switching. This however also means the threads > cannot be killed using runit. If I want to do that I have to resort to manual > hard killing (-1, -9) > > And now the questions: > > 1) Am I right in stating that this is the normal behaviour or is there > something > wrong with my run script? I suppose not, but it would be very nice to have > this > confirmed by you. Server is now production ready as far as I am concerned but > I'm not 100% sure about this yet, regarding nfs. > > 2) Is it advisable to have a 'kill all nfsd/lockd threads by pid` in the > finish > script yes? > > I would be very thankful if anybody could enlighten me with these last bits > for my perfect server. No one ever answered this old question. Now I'm at that point too, and have the very same set of questions. Does anyone know how to use runit to control a standard Linux NFS server set up? The mountd script on Gerrit's website don't work for me as the rpc.mountd process and the nfsd processes remain after the run script terminates. Adding, say, kill -HUP `pidof nfsd` to a finish script removes the nfsd threads together with the lockd thread, but the rpc.mountd process doesn't terminate without an explicit kill too. Regards, -- Richard A Downing FBCS CITP http://www.109bean.org.uk/ "The sole purpose of stupid people is to teach clever people what not to do."