On 28/11/19 11:36 +, Yan Gao wrote:
> On 11/28/19 1:19 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>> There is some room for coming up with better option naming and
>> meaning. For example maybe the cluster-wide "maintenance-mode"
>> should be something like "force-maintenance" to make clear it takes
>>
On 11/28/19 1:19 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 12:13 +, Yan Gao wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> First thanks for bringing this up, Aleksei.
>>
>> On 11/26/19 3:38 PM, Aleksei Burlakov wrote:
>>> Dear Developers,
>>>
>>> I would like to raise a discussion about an issue/feature about
On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 12:13 +, Yan Gao wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First thanks for bringing this up, Aleksei.
>
> On 11/26/19 3:38 PM, Aleksei Burlakov wrote:
> > Dear Developers,
> >
> > I would like to raise a discussion about an issue/feature about
> > the
> > maintenance property applied to
Hi all,
First thanks for bringing this up, Aleksei.
On 11/26/19 3:38 PM, Aleksei Burlakov wrote:
> Dear Developers,
>
> I would like to raise a discussion about an issue/feature about the
> maintenance property applied to different levels of a cluster.
>
> In order to explain the problem lets
Dear Developers,
I would like to raise a discussion about an issue/feature about the maintenance
property applied to different levels of a cluster.
In order to explain the problem lets consider several examples.
Scenario 1. There is a primitive p1 in a group g1. When applying the
maintenance
