Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:12:17 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> To: =?UTF-8?B?xYF1a2FzeiBXxIVzaWtvd3NraQ==?= <lukasz@wasikowski.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re-starting daemons across upgrades? Message-ID: <4E838DB1.8050003@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4E83863E.3040607@wasikowski.net> References: <20110912230943.GD33455@guilt.hydra> <4E6E99BC.4050909@missouri.edu> <1315905051.1747.208.camel@xenon> <4E6F8A50.9060205@gmx.de> <1315942042.1747.258.camel@xenon> <4E6FD71D.9010207@gmx.de> <20110914181553.f6d31b0f.cjr@cruwe.de> <4E722F3F.3030606@wasikowski.net> <20110915180815.GA46983@guilt.hydra> <4E7247F2.7080207@wasikowski.net> <20110915183710.GA47127@guilt.hydra> <4E7253AF.7030602@wasikowski.net> <4E725782.3090107@gmx.de> <CADLo839_KJZGpjYcdFM1a3jqGCg4EHrz08xnNEQ30uW2c4uz7w@mail.gmail.com> <CAGMYy3vugL=YVqzH6-u81dLitgZU55tEnuuBnfqwyg86Wf9t3g@mail.gmail.com> <46157122.20110916135126@serebryakov.spb.ru> <4E73709D.5020004@gmx.de> <4E73AADB.8060804@FreeBSD.org> <4E74639E.1060207@gmx.de> <4E7657AA.1050906@wasikowski.net> <4E836D2F.3070708@gmx.de> <4E83863E.3040607@wasikowski.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 28.09.2011 22:40, schrieb Łukasz Wąsikowski: > W dniu 2011-09-28 20:53, Matthias Andree pisze: > >>> We shouldn't go that way at all. Restarting service right after it's >>> update is not a good thing. In many cases service will not start, >>> because of needed configuration changes od other ports not recompiled or >>> updated. The safe way is to not stop service at all. Let the system >>> operator restart service manually when he finish all the needed update >>> tasks. >> >> Well, the maintainer should know if the service can be restarted or >> needs manual intervention. For patch level upgrades - pathological cases >> like OpenLDAP or Cyrus-SASL interactions aside - you normally can >> restart the service without further ado. > > That's true. Still, I often like to update software during the work > hours and restart it in the middle of the night. It's not as annoying to > customers as restarting critical service during peak hours. Restart time > should be left for operator to decide. So basically, we need a lever the operator can flip, and that typical ports running daemons, respect - that can state whether ports auto-restart deamons previously running (which would entail complaining the if needs manual intervention, like chasing configuration language changes, or other), or whether not to and just collect their names and list them so the operator can do it at a convenient time -- assuming the daemons are up to that task (continue running). On the other hand, one might wonder if in such cases it's not better to pre-build the required updated packages in Tinderbox, and install them as binary package at a convenient time later. My line of reasoning is that "live" updates (meaning replacing ANY parts of the system) probably aren't a good idea if there's a nontrivial number of ports to rebuild, unless you have a full set of old packages backed up (to roll back quickly if something goes amiss in the upgrade) and new ones pre-built but not yet installed (to roll forward quickly without the need to wait for - possibly failing - builds).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E838DB1.8050003>