Comments by "" (@grokitall) on "No This Is Not A Linux Joke" video.

Live patching has its uses, but most problems can be run as sharded clusters, where you take one shard out of service, update, and reboot, then do the same for the next one. This preserves system uptime, but not machine uptime. The problem with live patching is that you end up with long running code still running the old library version except when you patch the kernel.
10
 @Haydatsanime boxed distros were killed by being able to ask Ubuntu to send you a free cd.
1
@Vegemeister1 restarting a cluster is a solved problem. You can use wake on lan to wake up a machine from powered down, and doing update and reboot works if the kernel or core libraries change. If they don't, you can just shut down the service and restart it. Bearing in mind the only time it makes sense to live patch is for high throughput systems, sharding gives much better scalability. In this sort of throughput scenario, you are basically talking about high availability systems, so having multiple machines as part of the system is already a given for reliability and resilience reasons, so sharing does not add much load at all. Tools like ansible even make this whole process relatively easy. I think it was Netflix who intended to reboot a specific machine and accidentally rebooted their entire data center instead, which only took a couple of minutes to come back up.
1