On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Nick Moffitt <n...@zork.net> wrote: > Mark Stanislav: > > Fault tolerant infrastructure should be the point. > > Absolutely, but the granularity of nagios and puppet (Every half hour? > Every ten minutes? Every five?) is simply too coarse to qualify as > fault-tolerance. Propping a broken service back on its feet at this > frequency is worse than nothing, in my opinion. > > We absolutely design properly highly-available services, but patching > over serious crashes at even a one minute resolution would give us false > confidence in our architecture. >
Can you use the "basic" service provider with fully-specified start/stop/restart commands to achieve what you need? > > -- > "No, I ain't got a fax machine! I also ain't got an > Apple IIc, polio, or a falcon!" > -- Ray, Achewood 2006-11-22 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<puppet-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
