Use systemd's watchdog functionality instead of heart?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Use systemd's watchdog functionality instead of heart?

Mikael Pettersson-5
One of our devops people recently commented that heart made management
of beam VMs in systemd-enabled systems more complicated.

I investigated a bit, and found that systemd supports being a watchdog
for a service, via sd_notify() calls with WATCHDOG=1 messages, and
appropriate configuration in the unit file.

Interestingly enough, there _is_ systemd support in OTP, but only in epmd.

Is there a good reason _not_ to use systemd's watchdog functionality
instead of heart, where available?

/Mikael
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Use systemd's watchdog functionality instead of heart?

lmdthel
Mikael, You can also look at:

Thomas

tir. 19. feb. 2019 kl. 21.15 skrev Mikael Pettersson <[hidden email]>:
One of our devops people recently commented that heart made management
of beam VMs in systemd-enabled systems more complicated.

I investigated a bit, and found that systemd supports being a watchdog
for a service, via sd_notify() calls with WATCHDOG=1 messages, and
appropriate configuration in the unit file.

Interestingly enough, there _is_ systemd support in OTP, but only in epmd.

Is there a good reason _not_ to use systemd's watchdog functionality
instead of heart, where available?

/Mikael
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Use systemd's watchdog functionality instead of heart?

Mikael Pettersson-5
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 9:24 PM Thomas Elsgaard
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Mikael, You can also look at:
>
> https://gist.github.com/maxlapshin/01773f0fca706acdcb4acb77d91d78bb
>
> Thomas
>
> tir. 19. feb. 2019 kl. 21.15 skrev Mikael Pettersson <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> One of our devops people recently commented that heart made management
>> of beam VMs in systemd-enabled systems more complicated.
>>
>> I investigated a bit, and found that systemd supports being a watchdog
>> for a service, via sd_notify() calls with WATCHDOG=1 messages, and
>> appropriate configuration in the unit file.
>>
>> Interestingly enough, there _is_ systemd support in OTP, but only in epmd.
>>
>> Is there a good reason _not_ to use systemd's watchdog functionality
>> instead of heart, where available?

It's quite neat that one can message systemd directly from Erlang, but
the basic question remains: is there any technical reason to keep
using heart as a watchdog when one has systemd?
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Use systemd's watchdog functionality instead of heart?

Max Lapshin-2
We are using systemd in flussonic.

I personally do not like it and consider that systemd is a very underdesigned, badly planned piece of software that do not do required things and do what it should not do.

However it is everywhere and we have switched to systemd.

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions