[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [atomic-devel] Has anyone considered packaging dumb-init or tini for use in Fedora/CentOS/RHEL?





On 03/06/2017 10:02 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote:
Dumb-init is more like nohup, or tee, or strace. It's for processes (most of them) that don't deal with being PID 1. So jumping through hoops to write a unit file feels like you're saying "do it the hard way" when I know perfectly well that I don't need to do it the hard way.
I get it.

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccoleman redhat com <mailto:ccoleman redhat com>> wrote:

    Please do not tell me that I want to write a unit file when the
    *entire* ecosystem takes command lines just fine.  I have hundreds
    of dockerfiles that have entry points - why do I need to write
    unit files for them?  I have command line tools that generate
    docker images... with command lines - why would I want to write
    unit files for them?

    Also, dumb-init is not an init system.  It's a signal proxy.


    On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Scott McCarty <smccarty redhat com
    <mailto:smccarty redhat com>> wrote:

        I am skeptical of any "resource" argument against systemd. Are
        you seeing some actually impact to performance that is causing
        problems? As for unit files, they are rediculously easy. Much
        easier than figuring out how to start a daemon properly by
        reading documentation.

        I don't have a strong opinion for CentOS/Fedora. But for RHEL,
        I think multiple init systems will just generate more
        technical questions from customers and eat up more sales
        resources explaining when people should use what. Options are
        great, but confusing, that's why Apple got rid of a lot of them...


        On 03/06/2017 09:48 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote:

            Zero overhead, defunct process management, proper logging,
            simplicity, no moving parts, no additional unit file (I
            don't have unit files).

            Turn it around - if I have the command line
            "ansible-playbook ...", what does systemd get me?

            On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Eric Paris
            <eparis redhat com <mailto:eparis redhat com>
            <mailto:eparis redhat com <mailto:eparis redhat com>>> wrote:

                On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 21:22 -0500, Clayton Coleman wrote:
                > They'd be really helpful for cases where you don't
            want full blown
                > systemd, but want a long running container that
            needs to reap
                > processes.  I don't know that one or the other
            matters, I have a
                > slight bias for dumb-init in terms of signal
            rewriting (a few cases
                > might need that).
                >
                > Anyone using these today?

                What does dumb-init or tini get me that systemd doesn't?



--
        Scott McCarty, RHCA

        Technical Product Marketing: Containers

        Email: smccarty redhat com <mailto:smccarty redhat com>

        Phone: 312-660-3535 <tel:312-660-3535>

        Cell: 330-807-1043 <tel:330-807-1043>

        Web: http://crunchtools.com

        When should you split your application into multiple
        containers? http://red.ht/22xKw9i




--

Scott McCarty, RHCA

Technical Product Marketing: Containers

Email: smccarty redhat com

Phone: 312-660-3535

Cell: 330-807-1043

Web: http://crunchtools.com

When should you split your application into multiple containers? http://red.ht/22xKw9i


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]