Simon Walter said on Tue, 18 Jun 2024 21:02:46 +0200

>On 2024-06-18 02:27, Peter Duffy wrote:
>> Just to be clear . . .
>
>OK, thank you. I'm clear about what you said now, and I couldn't agree
>more.
>
>...
>>
>> The thing which permanently set me against systemd was that when I
>> first tried it (testing RH7), the box wouldn't shut down. It just
>> gave a message about "asserting shutdown state" or some such pompous
>> baloney, and then hung. I had to hold down the power button. When the
>> system came back up, it complained about ungraceful shutdown and ran
>> a full set of disk checks. Maybe not so bad if the box is on my desk.
>> Rather more of a problem if it's a mission-critical server in an
>> unmanned server farm, I'm trying to sort out a major problem on it,
>> and it's 03:00 in the morning. (Strangely enough, I noticed on one
>> of the FB linux groups only a few days ago that someone else had
>> just had the shutdown hang problem.)
>
>This was my first experience with systemd too. I never used it again. I
>know maybe it's improved. I don't have time to be a BETA or ALPHA
>tester. Besides, it's my customers money. I'm not testing jack shit on
>them.
>
>I find it very interesting that this occurs so frequently and it's a
>total show stopper - this non-deterministic behaviour.

Since forever I've often had systemd sometimes take many minutes to shut
down. Which introduces the ultimate irony: What good is saving 5
seconds (if that) on boot when you lose minutes on shutdown?

SteveT

Steve Litt

http://444domains.com