[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A stop job is running for...

On Wednesday 02 December 2015 14:02:50 Jape Person wrote:

> On 12/02/2015 01:21 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 02 December 2015 06:06:09 Martin Read wrote:
> >> On 02/12/15 03:07, James P. Wallen wrote:
> >>> Thanks for your response, Sven. It's nice to know that someone
> >>> else has seen this type of problem. I was thinking that this could
> >>> be self-inflicted. Perhaps that's a little less likely now.
> >>>
> >>> So, is this behavior controlled by systemd?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not trying to start a fracas. I'm really interested. What I'm
> >>> asking is, do I need to start poring over systemd documentation to
> >>> see if there might be a way to control this behavior?
> >>
> >> If a stop job is taking two minutes, that suggests that the service
> >> has one or more ExecStop lines defined in its service unit and that
> >> one of those commands is taking an unduly long time to complete for
> >> some reason.
> >>
> >> The default and per-service timeout values for stopping a service
> >> (after which systemd gives up and sends fatal signals to all of the
> >> service's processes) are configurable; see the
> >> systemd-system.conf(5) and systemd.service(5) man pages for
> >> details.
> >
> > 'scuse me, but shouldn't the errant process be fixed so it can stop
> > and clean up after itself?  Thats the real bug here.
> >
> >
> > Cheers, Gene Heskett
> It's occurred to me that, though I have occasionally seen service
> shutown issues with sysv-init, they were never as pervasive or
> repetitve as it has been since switching to systemd as the init
> system. And the issue seems to be happening with several different
> types of services. That at least begs the question as to whether the
> problem is really with the services themselves or with the way they
> are controlled by systemd.
> I'm guessing that this is just a sort of shakedown cruise problem,
> where it may be that those who develop and maintain some packages will
> have to customize those packages' service units to work properly with
> systemd OR that there are problems with systemd itself OR both.
> Or maybe end users like me just need to learn to deal with systemd.
> However, the idea of having end users edit service units hardly seems
> like an ideal routine.
> Regards,
> JP

I can agree with that. I can hack up a bash script now & then, but 
wholesale patching really is the sources problem once he/she is aware 
there is a problem.  But it bugs the heck out of me that the guy/gal 
doing the codeing doesn't watch the user lists, so it all has to wait on 
someone qualified enough to wade thru the bug reporter forms and 
actually file the bug.  Thats quite often a week or more additional 
delay before they are aware that there really is a problem.

In the meantime, its hit another 200 users, discouraging them from ever 
touching linux again.  In that regard, we are our own worst enemy at 
times.  Unfortunately, the oar I steer this ship with could be swapped 
for a toothpick and have exactly the same result.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

Reply to: