Simo Sorce <simo(a)redhat.com> 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