Re: [systemd-devel] Where the pid=1 limits come from when using systemd

2018-10-08 Thread Jeffrey Zhang
Thanks Richard, That explains why archlinux NOFILE is 1048576. archlinux is using systemd 239.2-1 But it still can not explain where the pid=1 process limits come from? is there any way to change it? On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:31 PM Richard W wrote: > There's an issue on github on this: > https:

[systemd-devel] Where the pid=1 limits come from when using systemd

2018-10-08 Thread Jeffrey Zhang
hey guys, In the recently test, i found some interesting phenomenon. in systemd service, if i configure LimitNOFILE=infinity, it is not a real infinity. the finally NOFILE will be 65536 ( on centos7 ) and 1048576 ( on archlinux), and the pid=1 process also have the same value. So my question is,

Re: [systemd-devel] Default on failure dependencies

2018-10-08 Thread Krunal Patel
Hi, I just found root cause for this sevice not to start. It was simple parent folder permission issue. In this case it was /opt/apps/sdc which was set to root:root. I changed it to sdc:sdc and it allowed actual sdc_home inside /opt/SP/apps to start service without error code. Can you suggest

Re: [systemd-devel] Systemd not able to spawn Exec permission denied

2018-10-08 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mo, 08.10.18 05:17, Krunal Patel ([email protected]) wrote: > [Unit] > Description=StreamSets Data Collector (SDC) > > [Service] > User=sdc > Group=sdc > LimitNOFILE=32768 > Environment=SDC_CONF=/etc/sdc > Environment=SDC_HOME=/opt/streamsets-datacollector > Environment=SDC_LOG=/var/log/sd

Re: [systemd-devel] Default on failure dependencies

2018-10-08 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mo, 08.10.18 09:58, Jérémy Rosen ([email protected]) wrote: > > > This all makes me wonder whether a different approach to all of this > > wouldn't be better: maybe we should just consider this a logging > > problem: let's make sure we log a recognizable log message (i.e. a > > structured

Re: [systemd-devel] Default on failure dependencies

2018-10-08 Thread Jérémy Rosen
This all makes me wonder whether a different approach to all of this wouldn't be better: maybe we should just consider this a logging problem: let's make sure we log a recognizable log message (i.e. a structured journal message with a well-defined MESSAGE_ID=) whenever a service fails. With that

Re: [systemd-devel] sd-bus C++ wrapper: sdbusplus

2018-10-08 Thread Waqar Hameed
Thank you Lennart! I will do that then. With regards Waqar Hameed From: Lennart Poettering Sent: 05 October 2018 19:53 To: Waqar Hameed Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] sd-bus C++ wrapper: sdbusplus On Di, 02.10.18 12:0