I just miss the elegance of the solution: I personally want to model
one service with one s6 service. For me it would mean thinking about a
wrapper around s6 to get that. Maybe I get now the slew thing.
The thing is, s6 is a *process supervision* suite, so one s6 "service"
is really one long-running process. When you want health checks, you
have two long-running processes: your daemon, and your health checker.
So two s6 "services" is really the most elegant, most idiomatic and
most natural solution.
What you could have, on the other hand, is a s6-rc bundle, that
contains
both your daemon and your health checker: so you would be able to
handle both the daemon and the health checker (2 longruns) with a
single s6-rc/svctl command, using the name of the bundle.
It's probably something that I can add to the next version of s6-rc:
a command or an option to automatically add a health checker service to
a longrun that is declared in the database, so you wouldn't have to
write the health checker longrun manually. How does that sound?
And it's ok to need a wrapper to get useability, but the
advertisement of that should be better on the website that you SHOULD
use that wrapper (and for me this wrapper should be part of the s6
project).
This is indeed a UI problem and I'm still working on it. ;)
--
Laurent
