On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:40:16 AM Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> Systemd has invested a lot of time/effort to be able to relaunch failed
> services, support spawning and maintaining unix sockets and services across
> them, etc, that you'd have to push out of and across docker containers. All
> of that can be done, but why reinvent the wheel? Like you said, pacemaker
> can be made to make it all work, but I have yet to see a way to deploy
> pacemaker services anywhere near as easy as systemd+yum makes it. (Thanks
> be to redhat. :)

You should also consider "fleet", if you want a systemd-approach to containers. 
It's basically a cluster-wide systemd that often (but doesn't have to) 
start/restart docker containers on various hosts.

I tried it for a short while and it isn't bad.  The verbosity and 
repetitiveness of the systemd files was a bit annoying, but that would be easy 
to script away.  I did like how simple it was, and the ability to express 
dependencies between systemd entities.

Note that fleet is essentially systemd managing containers from the outside - 
not running systemd inside the container.  So in many ways it's a 
repeat/reinforcement of the same conversation we're already having.

 - Gus

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to