Bernhard Reiter bernhard@intevation.de writes:
Am Freitag 21 April 2017 12:26:12 schrieb Sebastian Wagner:
Just my 2¢ on some specific point coming up:
[...]
If we want intelmq simple, my strong recommendation is: a) implement (and thus support) only one process management solution. So if a proposal including systemd is considered the leading solution after the discussion, we should implement it and remove other process management approaches.
Even if systemd turns out to be a good choice, I'd vote against making it a hard dependency. The reasons are very much the same Bernhard stated him self in an earlier post: it would make IntelMQ a Linux only product, which would be a shame given the overall open and portable design of it.
[...]
Flow control is definitely an issue and a big topic we should discuss in depth. We (certat) do not need flow control currently but maybe you do?
What I mean by flow control is that we take the relations between the bots into account and implement strategies and tactics based on intelmq specific information. In Navtej's friday post you can see how he makes use of this information and proposes improved solutions to steer the flow within intelmq. To me it feels like an intelmq process manager can do this much better, because it already know how the pipes are wired together.
Sooner or later I guess intelmq will need this kind of "flow control" to be able to fulfill its promise of providing a fast and fully automatable system. So it may become interesting to you at certat as well. :)
This might or might not be true, currently the problems we are observing are quite fundamental and don't need overly clever solutions. I'd like to point to the proposal Bernard Herzog made in issue 709 last year: https://github.com/certtools/intelmq/issues/709 it outlines a rather simple solution to much of the resource problems, and demonstrates how to build solutions that don't depend on an higher level service, with in depth knowledge of the bots interactions.
[...]
Does "reload" more than "restart"? AFAIU, they are performing the same checks. The only difference is, that restart stops/starts the running continuous bots, and reload sends sighup to those.
If it does not do more, get rid of it. (I thought it aims for doing more, but then bots would need to be prepared to flush some of their datastructure while running. It is much simpler for bot writers to just write for stop and start.)
Ack.
sascha