On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 08:45:43PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
The current default is mostly arbitrary. It was just selected as a nice round
value, in the spirit of "let's pick something large enough to be larger than
any
realistic process will ever need".
I think you're misinterpreting Michael's words that "it's safe enough to
ignore this problem".
IIUC, the idea is to set a longer timeout in those cases at the service level.
I.e. the problem is "ignored" only in the sense of the system-wide default
being
smaller, and the specific services setting a higher timeout as required.
Also, even with the current high defaults, some services still actually time out.
If something bad happens in that case, it is already happening. This is bad
for users in at least two ways. First, because they have to wait and wait, and
second because the timeout is actually hit so things *do* get terminated but when
this happens, we do nothing. The idea would be to lower the default timeouts,
but also approach any cases where we hit the timeout much more seriously.
I'm a bit confused why we can't just fix the units that are taking too
long instead of changing the global value. The change page mentions that
"it's not possible to fix every misbehaving service: in some cases the
misbehaviour comes from design flaws that are difficult to resolve." but
can't we just change their timeout? ie, add to packagekitd's service
file:
TimeoutStopSec=30s
(or 15 or whatever)?
Is there something wrong with that approach that I am not understanding?
kevin