2 ms·

As to the rationale of including timers, it is for stuff like mounting and unmounting remote disks etc The implementation is retarded. Last week my providers'

As to the rationale of including timers, it is for stuff like mounting and unmounting remote disks etc The implementation is retarded. Last week my providers' iSCSI fabric suffered a glitch, which hosed a whole bunch of servers for hours because systemd refused to boot when it found the volumes not present. These were in no way critical to the operation of the stack. However, some moron somewhere decided that locking the system for 5 minutes on boot, and then simply refusing to boot properly, when everything required to boot is actually in place and OK is the correct course of action. I have enough of that kind of deranged thinking to deal with coming from Windows, I don't need it from my Linux machines. Systemd sucks for servers. It might do a lot of nice fancy tech stuff, but it is extremely poorly thought out for use on the server.

AsyncAwait 10y ago
> systemd refused to boot when it found the volumes not present This is not normal systemd behaviour, it waits for the resource, but only 1min 30s by default and then continues booting, (unless the services are considered critical for reaching certain target), logging a failed service, someone must have therefore explicitly configured a custom behaviour in your situation. > The implementation is retarded. May be, or may be whoever configured the server this way is, who knows? > I have enough of that kind of deranged thinking to deal with coming from Windows As I said above, this is not standard systemd behaviour. I am not saying that systemd is perfect, but your case seems like misconfiguration, rather than "deranged thinking" from the systemd devs. I'l encarouge you to read more on its configuration, it's actually fairly flexible, this[1] is a solid starting point. 1 - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd
- mdekkers 10y ago
  Standard Ubuntu 16.04. From my reading, it waits 90 seconds, then some more, and then even more.
  - AsyncAwait 10y ago
    Not the case on Arch, but you can customize timeout anyway[1], using TimeoutSec, TimeoutStartSec and TimeoutStoptSec, or even the global setting[2]. 1 - https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.ser... 2 - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33776937/how-to-change-the-systemd-timeout-in-centos http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33776937/how-to-change-th...
- kasabali 10y ago
  Bailing out and dropping to the rescue shell when a mount point in /etc/fstab failed is DEFINITELY the normal systemd behavior.One has to mark it as nofail otherwise systemd will assume it is required for boring the system. (this was originally meant as a reply to above comment was mistakenly posted to grandparent.)
kasabali 10y ago
Bailing out and dropping to the rescue shell when a mount point in /etc/fstab failed is FOR SURE the standard systemd behavior.One has to mark it as nofail otherwise systemd will assume it is required for boring the system.

AsyncAwait 10y ago

> systemd refused to boot when it found the volumes not present This is not normal systemd behaviour, it waits for the resource, but only 1min 30s by default and then continues booting, (unless the services are considered critical for reaching certain target), logging a failed service, someone must have therefore explicitly configured a custom behaviour in your situation. > The implementation is retarded. May be, or may be whoever configured the server this way is, who knows? > I have enough of that kind of deranged thinking to deal with coming from Windows As I said above, this is not standard systemd behaviour. I am not saying that systemd is perfect, but your case seems like misconfiguration, rather than "deranged thinking" from the systemd devs. I'l encarouge you to read more on its configuration, it's actually fairly flexible, this[1] is a solid starting point. 1 - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd

mdekkers 10y ago
Standard Ubuntu 16.04. From my reading, it waits 90 seconds, then some more, and then even more.
- AsyncAwait 10y ago
  Not the case on Arch, but you can customize timeout anyway[1], using TimeoutSec, TimeoutStartSec and TimeoutStoptSec, or even the global setting[2]. 1 - https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.ser... 2 - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33776937/how-to-change-the-systemd-timeout-in-centos http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33776937/how-to-change-th...
kasabali 10y ago
Bailing out and dropping to the rescue shell when a mount point in /etc/fstab failed is DEFINITELY the normal systemd behavior.One has to mark it as nofail otherwise systemd will assume it is required for boring the system. (this was originally meant as a reply to above comment was mistakenly posted to grandparent.)

kasabali 10y ago

Bailing out and dropping to the rescue shell when a mount point in /etc/fstab failed is FOR SURE the standard systemd behavior.One has to mark it as nofail otherwise systemd will assume it is required for boring the system.