Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de> wrote: > On Thu, 22.07.10 15:19, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
[...] > > Bad example, it may make sense if you have a single host, but if you > > have multiple HTTP servers, you want the one that died to stop answering > > until it is back up and running and ready to server requests. > > > > The last thing you want is to have a client wait forever because the > > systemd doesn't kill the socket but apache is not able to properly > > restart (say for a configuration mistake). > Well, not everything makes sense in all contexts. If you have a fallback > web server in place then you don't need this trick. But I am pretty sure > there are more web serving devices on this planets that do no failover > like you suggest then there are that do this. And for those, which > otherwise have no defined fallback path it is certainly really awesome > if they can just restart apache if it crashes and can rest assured that > they won't lose any request except the one apache actually crashed on. Sorry, but what if the configuration got screwed up, and <whatever daemon> just won't start properly? Was replaced by a broken version which crashes on startup? Or gets into a loop (or just does something very timeconsuming sometimes) before being ready to answer? This _needs_ answers. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile 2340000 Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
