| 13 Jun 2023 |
 emily | so yeah my inclination is that it would be good to have something default that ensures we're not issuing certificates at a rate that would surpass that. but preferably not full serialization since that's quite a lot further than that | 20:21:15 |
| emily | I feel like there should be a good way to rate limit these services starting without fussing with CPU quotas or whatever. | 20:21:44 |
| emily | okay there is | 20:22:08 |
| emily | we have StartLimitIntervalSec/StartLimitBurst/StartLimitAction which look perfect. however, I'm guessing that we would need to switch over to @ units to use it - because otherwise all our services are entirely separate | 20:22:45 |
| emily | unless it counts the bit after the @ as part of the unit for rate limiting and it's just for making restarts not spam :/ | 20:23:03 |
| emily | we need a systemd expert :) | 20:23:22 |
 m1cr0man | afaik StartLimit* only applies to services which would enter the failed state? I did consider suggesting that :) however the docs imply it's only for failure. You would need to pair it with Condition/Assert* directives in the unit section, which would be evaluated en masse and actually wouldn't stop concurrency at activation at all | 20:23:50 |
| emily | it does say "Configure unit start rate limiting. Units which are started more than burst times within an interval time span are not permitted to start any more." but yeah I'm not sure if it would work | 20:24:32 |
| m1cr0man | I was thinking we could use unit retry logic + ConditionPathExists for really easy locking and semaphores | 20:24:44 |
| emily | maybe I'm missing some verbiage that applies it's restart-specific but it seems to mostly note that as a side thing? | 20:25:27 |
| m1cr0man | afaik "Units which are started" means "for each unit started" rather than "for all units started", so dynamic services would all be individual services and have their own startlimits | 20:25:31 |
| emily | but I have a suspicion that it may treat all @ unit instantiations as separate in which case it wouldn't help us anyway. sigh, ACME issuance should really be handled as a daemon | 20:25:52 |
