On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:40:16 AM Fox, Kevin M wrote: > Systemd has invested a lot of time/effort to be able to relaunch failed > services, support spawning and maintaining unix sockets and services across > them, etc, that you'd have to push out of and across docker containers. All > of that can be done, but why reinvent the wheel? Like you said, pacemaker > can be made to make it all work, but I have yet to see a way to deploy > pacemaker services anywhere near as easy as systemd+yum makes it. (Thanks > be to redhat. :)
You should also consider "fleet", if you want a systemd-approach to containers. It's basically a cluster-wide systemd that often (but doesn't have to) start/restart docker containers on various hosts. I tried it for a short while and it isn't bad. The verbosity and repetitiveness of the systemd files was a bit annoying, but that would be easy to script away. I did like how simple it was, and the ability to express dependencies between systemd entities. Note that fleet is essentially systemd managing containers from the outside - not running systemd inside the container. So in many ways it's a repeat/reinforcement of the same conversation we're already having. -- - Gus _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
