Am 22.11.2013 03:04, schrieb salil GK: > Thanks a lot David > > On 22 November 2013 06:44, David Timothy Strauss <da...@davidstrauss.net > <mailto:da...@davidstrauss.net>> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:57 PM, salil GK <gksa...@gmail.com > <mailto:gksa...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > What happens is - my process may be busy with some other activity during > > which time it will fail to send periodic message to systemd. After a > while > > it will come out of it's loop and ready to serve. But during this time > > system would have already marked the process as failed. > > Then you need to either use another thread, refactor to make a tighter > event loop, or increase the watchdog time. Drifting in and out of > tolerance with watchdog is not a safe strategy.
the problem i see with "use another thread" is that this thread can happily work and send it's keep alive, but that does not mean at the end that the service itself is working OK and responsible because both are running isolated in case of network services it would be pretty cool if systemd watchdog could be configured to connect to the service avery n seconds and if there is no response restart it because this would monitor the real service without need external tools
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel