3 ms·
These supervisor projects are always a chuckle. Is anyone ignorant enough to believe that any monitor can survive general process failure or contribute to reco
by vor1968 10y ago
These supervisor projects are always a chuckle.
Is anyone ignorant enough to believe that any monitor can survive general process failure or contribute to recovery of a system with abnormal function or resource starvation?
And that is the basic reason for these monitors! garbage.
My last experience was with bluepill which was this mess of
ruby nonsense. Anyone with any experience knows you can't trust a system to correct it's own failure. Why are we hammering this nail over and over to catch a 30% recoverable transient...management.
- nbari 10y agoI think that's why they are external "monitoring" tools to check how the status of your services and rather than just restarting a daemon, the ones if required could add more instances, restart them or rebuild everything, maybe something like https://epazote.io/ https://epazote.io/
- skarnet 10y agoYou need to read the archives of the supervision mailing-list at list.skarnet.org, as well as http://skarnet.org/software/s6/overview.html http://skarnet.org/software/s6/overview.html - there is a lot of value in process supervision, it's just that most people who whip up their own solution end up doing it wrong. Like crypto, in a less dramatically noticeable way.