I opened issue 100 for this: https://github.com/kr/beanstalkd/issues/100
On Feb 13, 9:16 am, Thomas Parrott <thomas.parrott%infinity- [email protected]> wrote: > As an aside, the example init script in the beanstalkd repo uses the - > d flag. > > Maybe I am missing some feature in the Redhat init scripts that allows > daemonising a process that doesn't support it. > > On Feb 13, 9:14 am, Thomas Parrott <thomas.parrott%infinity- > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > I too agree with using a proper process manager, however it would be > > really useful to have the -d flag back, as everything else in our > > stack daemonizes itself (apache, nginx, mysql, puppet, redis etc) and > > moving to a process manager is more of a separate project (not one I > > have time to look at atm). This leaves me with having to use & at the > > end of the command line and this looks messy and does not play nicely > > with Redhat init scripts. > > > On Feb 12, 6:11 pm, Peter Kieltyka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hey Keith, > > > > What you're saying makes sense. It's better practice to let the OS's > > > init/launch mechanisms daemonize a process. Not to keep beating a dead > > > horse.. -d is convenient for quick deploys, without having to write > > > your own init script. Each variant of the OS has their own nuances and > > > it's annoying to have to fiddle with those scripts to boot the daemon. > > > beanstalkd & isn't a good option because you'll have to do some extra > > > work to handle the HUP on exit of the shell... something like > > > beanstalkd & disown, but depends on the OS. > > > > It's really just a convenience thing.. and keeping -d doesn't take > > > away from sysops who want the OS to daemonize/manage the process. > > > Anyways, I'm done now :) whatever you decide is cool... beanstalkd is > > > awesome, good work on 1.5, its solid. > > > > Peter > > > > On Feb 5, 1:12 am, Keith Rarick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Chad Kouse <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I agree it's handy. I run dedicated beanstalkd servers so I can see > > > > > the value. Ops team would appreciate only having one thing to monitor. > > > > > If its a big issue though it's no problem. We will make it work. > > > > > Thanks for the great work. > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > It really shouldn't be any more difficult to run beanstalkd without the > > > > -d flag. I've tried to make switching more straightforward by including > > > > several examples of configuration for production process-monitoring > > > > tools. If there's anything else I can do to make life easier, I'd love > > > > to > > > > hear about it. > > > > > Ops teams in particular should be pleased that -d is no longer there > > > > to confuse the issue. It's easier to monitor a process that doesn't > > > > daemonize itself. > > > > > kr -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "beanstalk-talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.
