Timeline for When should I not kill -9 a process?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2014 at 20:46 | history | edited | Michael Mrozek | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 1 characters in body |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 21:01 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | This answer is part confusing and part wrong. kill -9 1 is just ignored under most unices. There's no need to avoid kill -9 for mount, but no point in it either. I don't know what you mean by “reverse the order of the processes”. kill -9 does stop (as in, kill) a process, without giving it a chance to complain, however the killing won't happen immediately if the process is in a non-interruptible system call. Killing a process with kill -9 does release most resources, but not all. | |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 20:36 | comment | added | Mikel | Looks like SysV shared memory and semaphores will have to be cleaned up, at least. archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-10/msg01065.php | |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 11:39 | comment | added | Mikel | The downvote was someone else. But which resources are not released? Do you just mean the process can't perform its normal cleanup? What about file locks , semaphores, etc.? Can you elaborate? | |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 10:29 | history | answered | HandyGandy | CC BY-SA 2.5 |