On Sun, 08.02.15 09:21, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > В Wed, 4 Feb 2015 14:34:01 +0100 > Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> пишет: > > > On Wed, 04.02.15 11:13, Peter Valdemar Mørch (pe...@morch.com) wrote: > > > > > First: Please let me know if this is an inappropriate place to ask this > > > > > > # systemctl restart syslog.socket rsyslog.service > > > > > > seems to always work. But > > > > > > # systemctl restart rsyslog.service syslog.socket > > > > > > , the opposite sequence, seems to sometimes fail (details below). I'm > > > wondering: Why is that? > > > > Whats are the precise ordering and requirement deps between those two > > services? > > > > Note that the command will first enqueue the restart job for the first > > mentioned service, then the restart job for the second service. It > > will then wait for both jobs to complete. Depending on the deps it > > might happen in the second case, that the service is first stopped, > > and then the socket stopped, and then the service started again. Now, > > when the socket is about to be started again too, the service will > > already be up, but in non-socket-activation mode, at which point the > > socket unit refuses to start up, in order to not corrupt the socket > > the service created on its own without usage of socket activation. > > > > Is it possible to build transaction involving all units? Then it would > not depend on precise ordering, right?
Michal Sekletar was working on a patch that made it possible to enqueue multiple specified jobs within a single transaction, but this has not been finished so far. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
