Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

[Michael Chapman <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Michael Chapman wrote:
[...]
> Note that when you're using Pacemaker to manage a systemd service, you 
> should not enable the service in the normal way -- that is, the service 
> should not be started simply by virtue of it being in the Wants= list of 
> multi-user.target. The service is intended to be started and stopped only 
> by Pacemaker.

Ah, there's something else I forgot to mention.

Since Pacemaker is in charge of the service's lifecycle, you almost 
certainly *do not* want it to be socket-activated.

libvirt can be run without socket activation [2]. I strongly recommend you 
configure it this way if you intend to manage libvirt in Pacemaker.

(I think managing libvirt in Pacemaker is a mistake, mind you. Sure, 
manage individual libvirt *guests* in Pacemaker. But managing libvirt as a 
whole from Pacemaker seems to be the wrong approach.)

[2] https://libvirt.org/daemons.html
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel