Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 15:10 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 09:06:22AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: >>> It generally is a bad idea to automatically restart a database based on >>> a random connection. There many reasons why you may have stopped the db >>> (or it may have stopped itself) and requires inspection before >>> attempting a new restart. Having to battle with socket activation while >>> in a critical situation is not a good idea. >> You'd have the same problem with any init system that supports automatic >> service restarting. You can easily disable the service via systemctl. > You can do that if you are doing a planned outage. But not for unplanned > ones. > I am not saying automatic restarts should never be employed, only that > not all software should be automatically restarted. I think databases > shouldn't in most cases. But that's just my opinion on the specific > case. That doesn't mean socket-activation shouldn't be employed in other > cases. FWIW, I do think that there may be use-cases for socket activation of a database. I'd like to support the option ... the problem is to do so without breaking existing, expected behaviors. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
