1 |
On Thu, March 28, 2013 07:59, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
2 |
> On 28/03/2013 04:56, Michael Mol wrote: |
3 |
>> On 03/27/2013 05:51 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
4 |
>>> On 27/03/2013 22:41, Michael Mol wrote: |
5 |
>>>> The case for systemd is twofold: |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>>> ... |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>>> 2) Reduce the amount of CPU and RAM consumed when you're talking about |
10 |
>>>> booting tens of thousands of instances simultaneously across your |
11 |
>>>> entire |
12 |
>>>> infrastructure, or when your server instance might be spun up and down |
13 |
>>>> six times over the course of a single day. |
14 |
>>> |
15 |
>>> I seems to me that this is rather a niche quite-specialized case |
16 |
>>> (albeit |
17 |
>>> a rather large instance of a niche case). In which case it would be |
18 |
>>> better implemented as Redhat MagicSauce for their cloud environment |
19 |
>>> where it would be exactly tuned to that case's need. |
20 |
>> |
21 |
>> But it's a great deal cheaper to convince volunteers and package |
22 |
>> maintainers to put in the time to build the necessary service files of |
23 |
>> their own accord. Add in the complexity of parallel boot, and you can |
24 |
>> induce upstream to fix their own race-driven bugs rather than have to |
25 |
>> pay for that development directly. |
26 |
>> |
27 |
> |
28 |
> I don't follow the thought stream here Michael. |
29 |
> It feels like there's a word or a sentence missing (it's just not |
30 |
> hanging together) |
31 |
|
32 |
Alan, I think what Michael is trying to say is that by getting other |
33 |
distros to package systemd, other distros will help RedHat to find and fix |
34 |
the problems systemd is causing. |
35 |
|
36 |
-- |
37 |
Joost |