I appear to have utterly failed to proof-read this before sending.
I shouln't attempt mailing list posts at the end of a work day.
Apologies.
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 07:00:38PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> In other words, although the notion of a sequencing is unlikely
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
sequencing the database server to start before the web server
> to result in functional problems (eg the database server failing to start
> up because it needs to talk to Apache) this doesn't go fo possible quantative
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
it will cause
> problems (slower boot time) which the parallel booting scheme is trying
> to address. I suppose I hadn't fully considered this aspect. I agree that
> we should avoid slowing down the boot process as a workaround for a buggy
> applicaton.
> Yes. I should have made more clear that I wouldn't intend to disregard a
^^^^^^^^
don't
> fix in the application; it was a question of the possibility of a pragmatic
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
a
> fix in the short term which I wanted to discuss.
--
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100901182740.gr26...@urchin.earth.li
