[systemd-devel] Should a unit be able to start, while its OnFailure unit is active?
zbyszek at in.waw.pl
Wed Jan 14 07:42:24 PST 2015
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 04:24:15PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Bogler at continental-corporation.com wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'd like to have your opinion on the following problem:
> In case a unit fails, we are using an OnFailure unit to
> handle the error (e. g. reset the config of the failed
> unit) and restart it.
> In one case the failed unit had dependencies to other
> units. Therefore, the failed unit was (re-)started when
> the other units started.
> This way, the OnFailure unit was active (which could
> delete the config), *while* the failed unit, which reads
> the config, was restarting!
> Is this behavior intended or could it be an advantage to
> let a unit "conflict" to its OnFailure unit in some way?
Yes, it's intended.
> A first idea for a workaround is to add an "After"
> dependency to the OnFailure unit in the real unit's
> service file. This way a job for the unit should be
> created but the unit would not start until the
> OnFailure unit finbished. Is this correct?
That's should work.
More information about the systemd-devel