From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1289 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alex Efros Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: Option for runsv/runsvdir to specify how many times to restart a service in a certain time period before giving up? Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 14:30:19 +0200 Organization: asdfGroup Inc., http://powerman.asdfGroup.com/ Message-ID: <20061030123019.GA30814@home.power> References: <4543AEE3.50200@alex-smith.me.uk> <20061030104923.GC32166@home.power> <20061030121321.GA27602@fly.srk.fer.hr> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1162211428 28927 80.91.229.2 (30 Oct 2006 12:30:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: supervision-return-1525-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Mon Oct 30 13:30:26 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@gmane.org Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14]) by ciao.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GeWHU-0006As-PO for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:30:20 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 22018 invoked by uid 76); 30 Oct 2006 12:30:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: Original-Received: (qmail 22012 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2006 12:30:42 -0000 Original-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Mail-Followup-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061030121321.GA27602@fly.srk.fer.hr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:1289 Archived-At: Hi! On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:13:21PM +0100, Dra?en Ka?ar wrote: > Sure, but if something's a common need for a large group of users, then > they call it a feature. Some of those who don't need such feature call it > a bloat, but I don't think that's a valid argument. No. Bloat isn't equal to 'new feature'. Bloated software isn't equal to feature-rich software. But if software has wrong features added in wrong places (from architecture view) then it's become bloated very quickly. Maybe it's good idea to include additional script in runit package (or distribute it separately) which can be used from ./finish script this way: # add 5 minutes timeout if service was started 5 times in last 10 sec restart-timeout --interval 10 --tries 5 300 But adding this functionality to runit is a bad idea just because you already can develop that restart-timeout script using current runit, and adding this feature to runit doesn't provide any additional gains. After all, it's a Unix Way. -- WBR, Alex.