OT: Switch it off and back on ...

Peter TB Brett peter.brett at livecode.com
Tue Aug 9 08:42:18 EDT 2016

On 09/08/2016 06:08, Matt Maier wrote:
> Because we're capable of building systems more complex than we can
> understand. So there are always ghost states it can get into that we didn't
> prepare for.
> I was reading about "crash only" programming a while ago. It like using the
> "turn it off and back on again"approach as a part of normal business. Since
> all of your systems need to be able to recover from a crash anyway, why
> bother programming a graceful shutdown? Just set them up so that they can
> pick up where they left off and crash them if anything isn't running
> perfectly.

At the conference, the "vulcanbot" continuous integration service was 
mentioned several times.  This is a microservice I created to facilitate 
our development workflow by linking our GitHub repositories to our build 

vulcanbot uses _exactly_ crash-only error handling; whenever something 
unexpected happens, it quits (generating informative log messages), and 
then gets automatically restarted by systemd.  In practice, this works 
incredibly well.


Dr Peter Brett <peter.brett at livecode.com>
LiveCode Technical Project Manager

LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list