(no title)
amoe_
|
7 months ago
I was pro-systemd at the time of the controversial discussions. I still think it's a net positive relative to what was there before. But personally speaking, it's only the core of the software (service management) that improved things for me. The other things (timers, journald) I either ignore or don't like, but perhaps they're useful for distributions.
jauntywundrkind|7 months ago
I forget what but timesync is missing a lot of nice to haves. But ditching grub for something much much much more manageable & a joy to use. Networkd and resolved have both had a lot of nice clear straightforward options, and I love how systemd unit files snap together for these networking concerns.
Journald has been ok for me, and I use it a lot, but not intensively. Having adequate performance is definitely a huge concern.
znpy|7 months ago
I run, at home and at work, vpns and having a good way to configure split-horizon dns is incredibly useful.
At a previous company we were able to ship a binary that would automatically configure a bunch of company settings on developers' linux laptops and got VPN configurations working with split-horizon dns very easily.
prior to this, doing split-horizon dns on linux basically meant running dnsmasq (!!!) on every linux laptop
msgodel|7 months ago
ahartmetz|7 months ago
Ferret7446|7 months ago
That sounds like an unequal comparison. For the same amount of log data and the exact same filter operation, journald should be strictly faster or equal to text logs. Are you sure this isn't because in your journald test you're going through a lot more logs? Because journald makes it easier/feasible to collect more logs.