On Thu, 19.12.13 03:02, Tony Seo (tonys...@gmail.com) wrote:
> I already knew that a process executed by socket activation would be
> respawn.
> But, what the important thing is that I don't know how to control the
> number of respawn.
When a service fails too rapidly systemd will stop restarting
the room means a possibility.
sorry, I make you confused because of that word.
Thanks
2014/1/7 David Timothy Strauss
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Tony Seo wrote:
> > But, I suspect that systemd has room not to get ACK from the server
> process
> > executed by service unit.
> > I concent
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Tony Seo wrote:
> But, I suspect that systemd has room not to get ACK from the server process
> executed by service unit.
> I concentrated on 3-way handshaking when I studied to analyze this problem.
>
> Isn't it right when we consider the systemd?
I'm not sure wha
Yeah, I got the process what you explain, thanks.
But, I suspect that systemd has room not to get ACK from the server process
executed by service unit.
I concentrated on 3-way handshaking when I studied to analyze this problem.
Isn't it right when we consider the systemd?
2014/1/1 David Timothy
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Tony Seo wrote:
> But What I really want to know is why the server process always waited in
> the accept stage, when I executed client process for the first after system
> boot.
It may hang in accept() if the service is Accept=true and the daemon
still tries to ac
First of all, thank you for advice you said.
You are right, I am a novice on TCP/IP, so I had studied that for a few
days.
Now, I understand that UDS Protocol and the difference between
"Accept=true" and "Accept=false".
But What I really want to know is why the server process always waited in
the a
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Tony Seo wrote:
> That situation continued whether "Accept= true" or not in service unit.
The reason I encouraged you to learn more about socket programming is
because this Accept= option isn't some sort of optimization or nuanced
thing you just try either way unt
Hello.
Since I had gotten the message from you, I had learned socket program for
normal test.
After making sample processes like server and client, I tested them in many
cases.
But, when I tested my sample codes, the common problem was founded that the
server process always waited for acceptance in
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Tony Seo wrote:
> Frankly speaking, I don't understand why service daemon is infinitely
> spawned when I set the option "Accept= false".
> And Why couldn't the client process connect to socket unit that I made by
> setting "Accept= true".
I think you need to lear
Hello.
As you recommend me to use "Accept=", I set this as "true".
But Client process waited for a few minute, it showed error message
"connection was refused".
In this case, The best case to execute the service unit is to set "Accept=
false".
But It will definitely present error message and be h
It seems odd to combine Type=oneshot with Accept=false (which is the
default for socket activation). The latter setting causes systemd to
expect a persistent daemon to accept() connections.
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.or
Hello.
I tried to execute a process by using socket activation.
As it is referred at systemd manual, I made "server" and "client" process
by using "sd-daemon.h" and "sd-daemon.c".
when I made those processes, I used UDS(Unix Domain Socket) to make
communication between server and client.
(I also m
12 matches
Mail list logo
