ANN: Closing AC

[Arkadiusz Miskiewicz]

On Sunday 11 December 2005 02:38, Tomasz Pala wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:23:12 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> > > Small chances for such think to work, as many of our services shall
> > > return HGW instead of DONE.
> >
> > Huh? You seem to have no idea how supervising is usually done. The
> > processes
>
> Indeed.
>
> How long does it wait until assumes that service is running (it should
> wait to eliminate risk of races - init part of one program can take
> longer than starting another)? What does it do when required service
> dies after some other (which depends on it) has already started (or is
> starting)? - I'm particullary interested in service restart/reload, as
> they're triggered automatically from logrotate.
It doesn't assume anything - if the child is there then it works, if it's not 
there then it died.

> > are run in foreground as childs of supervising process. If it dies then
> > process knows about that.
>
> Mmhhhmm... 'background'? Hm, why don't we use such a 'supervising
> process' now?
background for user but foreground for supervising process. We don't use it 
since no one tried to pust some supervisor into rc-scripts for examp.e.

> In short: some services can start just-to-die-SOON giving DONE.
With supervising there is no DONE. Take a look at daemontools.spec or free 
replacement (don't remember name).

> After all - what are the advantages? Faster startup (due to
> backgrounding jobs)? Sounds coming from my disks say no (maybe if
> someone has broken DNS, didn't initialize postgresql database or has
> some other misconfiguration).
I don't care about faster startup. I care only about one thing - start service 
again if it died.

-- 
Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz                    PLD/Linux Team
http://www.t17.ds.pwr.wroc.pl/~misiek/  http://ftp.pld-linux.org/