18

I have a computational task running for a few days on a linux server via SSH connection. It is not on the background, so the SSH connection is under hold of the task.

I want to restart the local machine (not the server) from which I have opened ssh session, but want to keep the task running. Is that any possible?

22

If your task is already launched, it is too late* to consider alternative solutions that insert an additional layer between your ssh session and the shell running the command, like screen, tmux, byobu, nohup and the likes.

If your process support to be placed in the background and particularly doesn't hang when stdout and stderr are unwritable/closed, you can put it in the background before logging out with ControlZ and bg then detach it from your shell with the disown builtin.

eg:

$ ssh localhost
You have new mail.
Last login: Fri Jun  6 11:26:56 2014

$ /bin/sleep 3600    


^Z[1] + Stopped                  /bin/sleep 3600
$ bg
[1] /bin/sleep 3600&
$ jobs
[1] +  Running                 /bin/sleep 3600
$ disown %1
$ exit
Connection to localhost closed.
$ ps -ef|grep sleep
jlliagre 12864     1  0 21:12 ?        00:00:00 /bin/sleep 3600
jlliagre 13056 12477  0 21:13 pts/18   00:00:00 grep sleep
$ 

* As Bob commented, there are actually several hackish ways to reparent a tty session under Linux. repty, retty, injcode and neercs. The most advanced looks to be reptyr but you might need root privileges to enable ptrace to hack your process.

  • I used Ctrl+Z, the job stopped and moved to background, then performed disown command. It returned: bash: warning: deleting stopped job 1 with process group 24876. Now my job is listed in ps -all but seem not working (CPU usage is 0%) – Ali Nov 3 '14 at 17:14
  • Seems my process is stopped. I guess I should have provided proces ID with disown command – Ali Nov 3 '14 at 18:09
  • @Ali I think you forgot to run the bg command to resume the suspended job. – Jason Zhu Nov 3 '14 at 21:31
  • 1
    @JasonZhu Thanks for pointing that. It was unclear the bg command was required in the first part of my reply. Edited. – jlliagre Nov 3 '14 at 22:24
  • 2
    If you forgot the bg command and only ran the disown command, you should be able to get the process running again with kill -CONT which does roughly the same that bg would. – kasperd Nov 4 '14 at 7:52
5

One solution is to use GNU screen. You could start up screen, run your command, then detach with C-a d. Later, to reconnect, do screen -r, and you are back in your previous session.

Other benefits of screen are window management (so you can switch to other shells while your command is running, without needing a new SSH connection), and it allows your command to remain in the foreground, whether in the current session or a later one.

Edit: As noted in the comments, this will only work if you remember to start screen before running the command. If the command is already running, then you will need @jlliagre's solution.

  • 2
    tmux is another program like screen that allows you to have a remote session which is not tied to your current SSH connection. – Darth Android Nov 3 '14 at 17:22
  • 2
    Your solution is great. However it does not completely fit to my question - I asked about currently running process, not a process to be run in the future using screen. – Ali Nov 3 '14 at 18:08
  • Ah, okay. In that case, I think you will need to use @jlliagre's solution. (As far as I know, there is not a way to connect an already running process to something like screen or tmux.) – Scott Weldon Nov 3 '14 at 18:15
1

One of the "standard" ways to do so, is to use the nohup command, included in coreutils, like this:

nohup COMMAND [ARGS] &

But the command will redirect the output (STDOUT & STDERR AFAIK) of the program into a file nohup.out, making it somehow annoying sometimes (like generating a huge log file), so you may want to make your own redirection, or redirect it to /dev/null if you want.

  • 2
    Read again. The process is already running. – Lightness Races with Monica Nov 3 '14 at 20:46
  • /ashamed didn't read carefully. Sorry. – wangguoqin1001 Nov 3 '14 at 20:49
  • Actually nohup can be used for this. Just suspend the running process and send it to background (Ctrl+ Z and run bg) and then you can issue nohup %1. – mike Nov 4 '14 at 13:34
0

In addition to nohup you can launch the process in background using "&" and subshell:

Suffix the command with & and wrap it in parentheses

$ (thecommand args &)

Lets say your process gains the pid 1922:

$ ps -f
UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMD
usr      11473  2643  0 15:07 pts/1    00:00:00 bash
usr      11922     1  0 15:11 pts/1    00:00:00 thecommand

Look that it's unattached from the shell process 11473 which was its original parent. So, if you exit or kill the current shell (11473), the process 11922 keep running, and it will be disconnected from the pts.

Try to exit the shell, and enter in a new shell. Even if, this shell is connected to the same pts, you can see the process now without a pts:

$ ps -fp 11922
UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMD
usr      11922     1  0 15:11 ?        00:00:00 thecommand

I don't how it's called or documented in Posix, but I use this way since 1990 in bsh, ksh and now in bash.

Lastly, you can use the bg builtin shell command:

Just launch your program and if you decide to pause it, or plan to keep it in background, type CTRL+Z:

$ thecommand
^Z
[1] Stopped          thecommand

Now let it continue to run in background:

$ bg
[1]+ thecommand &

If you look to the process infos, it has yet a parent process:

$ ps -f
UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMD
usr      12046  2643  0 15:18 pts/6    00:00:00 bash
usr      12571 12046  0 16:00 pts/6    00:00:00 thecommand
usr      12601 12046  0 16:04 pts/6    00:00:00 ps -f

So, exit from the current process. The running process in background is unattached from its original parent and keep running in background:

$ exit

Login again and look at process info:

$ ps -f 12571
UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMD
usr      12571     1  0 16:00 ?        00:00:00 thecommand

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.