On 9/2/20 3:01 AM, Amish wrote: > On 01/09/20 8:31 pm, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> 1. Adjust Squid to print the value of $NOTIFY_SOCKET together with the >> "Accepting..." line. This will confirm that the variable is set. It >> should be set. This debugging can be added without fear of producing too >> much info but it is unlikely to be insightful. >> >> 2. Add some kind of sd_notify() debugging that would show us what the >> first sd_notify() call was doing and when/whether systemd received the >> notification from Squid. I have not researched how to do that, but I am >> sure it is possible. I bet there are not enough notifications happening >> on your production server to cause problems, but you should practice on >> a lab server first, of course. > Ok. I will try above. But here is a note from "man sd_notify" about race > condition that MAY occur. > Conversely, if an auxiliary process of the unit sends an sd_notify() > message and immediately exits, the service manager might not be able to > properly attribute the message to the unit, and thus will ignore it, > even if NotifyAccess=all is set for it. Since the Squid worker that calls sd_notify() keeps running under normal conditions (and if it _does_ exit quickly, then its notification should be indeed ignored!), the above caveat seems irrelevant to me. Disclaimer: I do not know much about systemd and sd_notify(). I am just reading the documentation you found and applying it to Squid. Alex. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
