Re: dbmail init systemd

Am 15.07.2016 um 13:55 schrieb Gordan Bobic:
> On 2016-07-15 12:33, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 15.07.2016 um 13:26 schrieb Gordan Bobic:
>>> On 2016-07-15 12:24, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>> Am 15.07.2016 um 13:12 schrieb Gordan Bobic:
>>>>> On 2016-07-15 12:01, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>>>> Am 15.07.2016 um 12:58 schrieb Gordan Bobic:
>>>>>>> On 2016-07-15 11:43, Admin Beckspaced wrote:
>>>>>>>> i see there's also a systemd folder in the 3.2.3 version:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/pjstevns/dbmail/tree/master/systemd
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and some makefiles ....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> sorry ... i'm no linux expert, but could you perhaps shed some
>>>>>>>> light
>>>>>>>> on creating the proper systemd service files for my OS opensuse
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> would really love to have that nice auto-restart feature once a
>>>>>>>> dbmail
>>>>>>>> process crashes.
>>>>>>>> this is possble with using systemd service files, isn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I get that auto-restart on crash is conceptually a very DevOps
>>>>>>> way of glazing over the problem, I hope I am not the only one
>>>>>>> feeling
>>>>>>> a little nervous about trusting an application that randomly crashes
>>>>>>> on a regular basis with something as potentially important as email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> surely, but you have two options if a service crashs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * process monitoring which restarts it
>>>>>> * wait for complaint calls and start it by hand
>>>>>>
>>>>>> none of both will solve the underlying problem magically but "until i
>>>>>> don't know how to solve the real issue i refuse to start the service"
>>>>>> won't help ypu
>>>>>
>>>>> No option of migrating to something that doesn't crash if the bug
>>>>> isn't fixed upstream in a reasonable timeframe?
>>>>
>>>> define reasonable - not easy at least when you wrote many thousand
>>>> lines of code fro backends and integration between different services
>>>> and machines over 8 years.....
>>>
>>> Let me turn that adound - how long an acceptance of things being
>>> broken might be defined as reasonable?
>>
>> frankly - where should that discussion end?
>>
>> i just need to see the software which works like a wonder and don't
>> make other problems - and be it only that you lose adminitsrative
>> features which are possible over a encrypted sql connection and would
>> neet to be replaced with cronjobs since exectue a system command in a
>> web-application on a remote server isn't possible without degrade any
>> sense of security
>>
>> if you try to explain me my job forget it - if your services (no
>> matter which ones) have no watchdogs you would be better served when
>> one explains you your job which as sysadmin means high availbility in
>> case of the unexpexted happens
>
> Exactly - when _UNEXPECTED_ happens. It isn't unexpected if it happens
> on an hourly basis. HA is something to rely on in case of a disaster.
> What you seem to be advocating sounds more like accepting disaster as
> the permanent ongoing state

boah it does not on a hourly basis - the last crash was months ago here
troll somewhere else

_______________________________________________
DBmail mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.fastxs.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbmail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAleI0FoACgkQhmBjz394AnnJtQCfViAkJg2PcFOvdrcds99qLJPk
DgMAn2t6RVB+tjWPd4WECBp47W/PHKm/
=Nyd4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----