On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:37:35 +0200
Alex Suykov <alex.suy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The reason I think it's mostly useless is because the only use case
> for cgroup supervision is supervising double-forking daemons, which
> is not a very smart thing to do. A much better approach is to get rid
> of double-forking and then just directly supervise the resulting long
> running process.
> I can't think of any other cases where it would be useful.

I definitly have to correct you: cgroups are *NOT* designed to catch
wild forking processes. This is just a side-effect ot them.

The purpose is to control resource limits, like CPU, RAM, Disk I/O and
so on. So for linux it would definitly make sense to have an interface
to the full feature set.

Best Regards

Automatic-Server AG •••••
Oliver Schad
Turnerstrasse 2
9000 St. Gallen | Schweiz

www.automatic-server.com | oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com
Tel: +41 71 511 31 11 | Mobile: +41 76 330 03 47

Attachment: pgpibEWGc65QS.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to