On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:25:28PM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
> > It's still racy. What if both systemd and monit decide to restart
> > the process? Suppose, that systemd do this first, process was restarted
> > and only then - monit request to restart arrive. Or, only systemd decide
> > to resta
On 05 Mar 2014, at 22:07, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:34:19PM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
>> If the process existence is monitored by both Monit and systemd, then it's no
>> problem as long as Monit uses systemd's start/stop methods
>
> It's still racy. What if both sy
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:34:19PM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
> If the process existence is monitored by both Monit and systemd, then it's no
> problem as long as Monit uses systemd's start/stop methods
It's still racy. What if both systemd and monit decide to restart
the process? Suppose, that s
On 05 Mar 2014, at 16:06, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>> The restart of process via Monit (both old and new way) is exactly the same
>> risk as restarting it via systemd.
>
> But what if your system was configured to restart some service *both*
> with monit and systemd (this can be e.g. a defaul
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 03:00:58PM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
> On 05 Mar 2014, at 12:46, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> If you find some features dangerous, please explain which and why?
I thought it was pretty clear.
> The restart of process via Monit (both old and new way) is exactly the same
>
On 05 Mar 2014, at 12:46, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:35:49AM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
>> Monit can work in systemd environment fine, you just need to
>> use systemd's start/stop methods as Monit's start/stop program.
>
> Yes, it can, if you are sure that your system
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:35:49AM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
> Monit can work in systemd environment fine, you just need to
> use systemd's start/stop methods as Monit's start/stop program.
Yes, it can, if you are sure that your systemd's configuration
doesn't use any dangerous features of this bl
On 05 Mar 2014, at 10:02, Adrien CLERC wrote:
>> monit is not about its web gui. It is a system for proactive
>> monitoring, and these features of monit can conflict with
>> systemd's configuration (e.g. Restart=on-failure).
> Yes, I know that monit is really useful with stateless init systems.
Le 05/03/2014 10:29, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> Only if you install recommends by default.
I think this is the case right now. But I can't confirm this, because
I've written "APT::Install-Recommends false;" in my apt.conf a long time
ago to avoid installing too much packages.
> Systemd configu
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:02:31AM +0100, Adrien CLERC wrote:
> I don't know how the dependency solver handles this, but right now,
> monit will trigger sysvinit installation, but systemd-sysv will remove
> it, as it is referenced as a conflict.
Only if you install recommends by default.
> If sys
> monit is not about its web gui. It is a system for proactive
> monitoring, and these features of monit can conflict with
> systemd's configuration (e.g. Restart=on-failure).
Yes, I know that monit is really useful with stateless init systems. But
it can also be useful with others.
I don't know h
Package: monit
Version: 1:5.7-1
Severity: minor
--- Please enter the report below this line. ---
Hi,
First of all, despite the recent discussion about init in Debian, I
don't want to open a flame war, I just want to ask a question.
Does installing sysvinit make monit more useful?
The "issue" with
12 matches
Mail list logo
