Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[build/deb] use older systemd StartLimitInterval #47909

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 11, 2019

Conversation

jbudz
Copy link
Member

@jbudz jbudz commented Oct 10, 2019

This switches our service file to use the older StartLimitInterval configuration. There have been a number of reports of startup errors due to older systemd versions not supporting the newer StartLimitIntervalSec config. The service files are backwards compatible, but not forwards compatible, so this moves back to the old format.

I included two minor changes -

  1. restart on failure is fairly self explanatory, and shouldn't have any impact in practice
  2. RestartSec=3 - a minor precaution to wait for open sockets to close.

@jbudz jbudz added review Team:Operations Team label for Operations Team v8.0.0 v7.5.0 labels Oct 10, 2019
@jbudz jbudz requested a review from a team as a code owner October 10, 2019 21:19
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/kibana-operations (Team:Operations)

@jbudz jbudz changed the title Fix/start limit interval [build/deb] use older systemd StartLimitInterval Oct 10, 2019
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

💚 Build Succeeded

Copy link
Contributor

@spalger spalger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@jbudz jbudz merged commit d41ea22 into elastic:master Oct 11, 2019
jbudz added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2019
* StartLimitIntervalSec -> StartLimitInterval

* [build/deb] use older systemd StartLimitInterval
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants