Simo Sorce <s...@redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 15:10 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 09:06:22AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>> It generally is a bad idea to automatically restart a database based on
>>> a random connection. There many reasons why you may have stopped the db
>>> (or it may have stopped itself) and requires inspection before
>>> attempting a new restart. Having to battle with socket activation while
>>> in a critical situation is not a good idea.
>> You'd have the same problem with any init system that supports automatic
>> service restarting. You can easily disable the service via systemctl.
> You can do that if you are doing a planned outage. But not for unplanned
> ones.
> I am not saying automatic restarts should never be employed, only that
> not all software should be automatically restarted. I think databases
> shouldn't in most cases. But that's just my opinion on the specific
> case. That doesn't mean socket-activation shouldn't be employed in other
> cases.
FWIW, I do think that there may be use-cases for socket activation of a
database. I'd like to support the option ... the problem is to do so
without breaking existing, expected behaviors.
regards, tom lane
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
