Mike, I just rescued this post from the supervisor "not subscribed to the list" holding queue. You'll want to either subscribe using your above email address or use an email that you've already subscribed from to post.
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 11:13 -0800, Mike Lewis wrote: > Sorry about the delayed reply.... > > So, umm, how do you configure the environment variables then? > Via environment=... setting? You can't inherit it from > supervisord's environment as that would make all the processes > share the values, defeating the point I guess. How is that > easier than configuring supervisord directly? Or am I missing > something? > > > Well, they would be set in either the script that starts supervisord, > or in our case, the script we "source" to set our environment > variables in our dev environment which would be done before launching > supervisord. > > > So maybe you'd set > export FOO_PORT=12415 > export FOO_BASE_PATH=/tmp/1124 > export CHEESE_PORT=13553 > > > supervisord > > > and in the config it would be like > > > ... > command=cheese -p %($CHEESE_PORT)s > ... > > > Could also use these variables for the port supervisord is running on > which would make it possible to have completely isolated instances of > supervisord + other software running on diff ports with the same > config. Doing this with a templating language is cumbersome because > you'd have to have a copy of the output of the templated configs for > each instance you want to run. > > > While I'm using a template for my configs (jinja2 to be > precise), I think I'm against adding such a feature to > supervisord core (not that I have any say in this). I'd guess > the requirements for more sophisticated config handling vary > from site to site so one size wouldn't fit all. Besides, I'm > quite happy with automatically (re)generating a config file > and issuing a supervisorctl update every now and then. One > other lesson I learned was to keep the process manager as > simple as possible with limited responsibilities and reasons > for updates -- that's one daemon you don't want to restart > frequently. > > > Yeah, adding it to the core would be a bad idea I feel as well. > Perhaps something where you can add a hook for a preprocessor would > be a nice compromise perhaps? > > > As an aside, I kinda wish supervisor was on github. > Would make it > much easier to contribute. > > > It is now. Whee, about to rebase my repo :) > > Where at? :) > > > Thanks, > Mike > _______________________________________________ > Supervisor-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users _______________________________________________ Supervisor-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.supervisord.org/mailman/listinfo/supervisor-users
