[systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation
Michael Chapman
mike at very.puzzling.org
Tue Feb 9 08:15:13 UTC 2021
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Michael Chapman wrote:
[...]
> Note that when you're using Pacemaker to manage a systemd service, you
> should not enable the service in the normal way -- that is, the service
> should not be started simply by virtue of it being in the Wants= list of
> multi-user.target. The service is intended to be started and stopped only
> by Pacemaker.
Ah, there's something else I forgot to mention.
Since Pacemaker is in charge of the service's lifecycle, you almost
certainly *do not* want it to be socket-activated.
libvirt can be run without socket activation [2]. I strongly recommend you
configure it this way if you intend to manage libvirt in Pacemaker.
(I think managing libvirt in Pacemaker is a mistake, mind you. Sure,
manage individual libvirt *guests* in Pacemaker. But managing libvirt as a
whole from Pacemaker seems to be the wrong approach.)
[2] https://libvirt.org/daemons.html
More information about the systemd-devel
mailing list