Re: Workers dying
- Mason Jones
- 2010-05-22 @ 01:38
I'm going to perhaps answer some of my own question here, after a
moment's thought, because I might have simply made a stupid assumption
-- do the Resque workers not run as daemons? Does the rake task then
need to be run via nohup? I thought not, but the SIGHUP seems to
indicate so. However, I'm fairly certain that I've had workers started
with a simple '&' run for quite some time after their ssh session was
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Mason Jones <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Okay, finally got a little bit of info tonight, when all four of my
> workers died. Interestingly, I see this at the end of their output:
>> rake aborted!
>> (See full trace by running task with --trace)
> I see the same thing for all of them. So...fair enough, they got a
> SIGHUP, they quit, which would be expected. So now I'm left wondering
> where the hell the SIGHUP is coming from. They were running in the
> background, started with:
> VERBOSE=1 QUEUE=load_data RAILS_ENV=production rake environment
> resque:work > log/resque1.log 2>&1 &
> I'm going to go back to running them in the foreground via 'screen'
> now, and I have a suspicion that I won't see this happen. I actually
> started these in the background exactly in order to see if they would
> die again. Running via screen is sort of okay, but is there an easy
> way then to use monit/god to start new ones if one dies?
> And...if anyone has great ideas of how to figure out the source of the
> SIGHUP (this is on a Debian EC2 instance), I'd love to hear 'em. I'm
> 99% certain it's not the oom-killer. Very odd.
> Thanks, all.