SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Structural and semantic deficiencies in the systemd architecture for real-world service management
This is a in-depth architectural critique of systemd. It claims to be the first purely technical review of systemd internals, and provides a detailed analysis of several components. It criticizes on the basis of ordering related failures, a difficult to predict execution model, non-determinism in boot-order, as well as several other points.
Though many users would perceive the long processing pipeline to increase reliability and be more "correct" than the simpler case, there is little to acknowledge this. For one thing, none of jobs, transactions, unit semantics or systemd-style dependencies map to the Unix process model, but rather are necessary complications to address issues in systemd being structured as an encapsulating object system for resources and processes (as opposed to a more well-defined process supervisor) and one accommodating for massive parallelism. Reliability gains would be difficult to measure, and that more primal toolkits like those of the daemontools family have been used in large-scale deployments for years would serve as a counterexample needing overview.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Friday October 16 2015, @03:54PM
The thing about System D to me is that it's not Linux. I have used UNIX since before Linux existed. I know Linux's startup procedure. It works. Everything is cool. I'm good with it. I don't want another operating system. If I did, I'd go look for one. If System D was another operating system, it would be great, just like there's Apache and nginix or Linux and FreeBSD or iOS and Android. There is probably a need in datacenters for Docker and System D, but they're not Linux. I don't want Linux to have its normal startup ripped out and replaced, because then I have to learn System D. I don't want to do that. I want to use the same skills I've had for decades. If there's a need for a new startup system, then great, people who need it can run it and learn it. Ripping out the normal startup procedure is the same difference as ripping out the shell and putting a VMS command interpreter in its place, or ripping out Perl and putting REXX in its place. Choice is great. If someone wants to use REXX, great, use it. As long as my scripting language isn't ripped out. The problem with System D is that it's ripping out what works and what has always worked without any choice. Just goes to show that Linux isn't really as open as we thought it was. This change is being pushed by a few people who want to rip out the heart of Linux and make it something else.
BTW - this is the WORST formatted, unreadable article ever. If you zoom in to make the text big enough to see, it gets cut off on the right. Never has something so high quality been presented so poorly.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday October 16 2015, @06:30PM
Simply choose "no style". While the formatting is horrible, the HTML is sane, and displays properly with "no style".
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 17 2015, @03:35PM
Agree about presentation. Fortunately Firefox has Reader Mode
http://www.betterhostreview.com/enable-firefox-reader-view.html [betterhostreview.com] (yes, this is the best link I found explaining it ....)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:16PM
There, it should adjust to zooming now.