On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 1:04 AM Jan Pokorný wrote:
>
> On 04/12/19 21:19 +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> > OTOH, this enforced split of state transitions is perhaps what makes
> > the transaction (comprising perhaps countless other interdependent
> > resources) serializable and thus feasible at all
On 04/12/19 21:19 +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> OTOH, this enforced split of state transitions is perhaps what makes
> the transaction (comprising perhaps countless other interdependent
> resources) serializable and thus feasible at all (think: you cannot
> nest any further handling -- so as to
On 04/12/19 14:53 +0900, Ondrej wrote:
> When adding 'LSB' script to pacemaker cluster I can see that
> pacemaker advertises 'restart' and 'force-reload' operations to be
> present - regardless if the LSB script supports it or not. This
> seems to be coming from following piece of code.
>
>
On 03/12/19 23:38 +0100, Valentin Vidić wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:14:41PM +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote:
>> The conclusion is hence that even with bleeding edge software
>> collection, there's no real problem in using ipt_CLUSTERIP
>> (when compiled in or alongside kernel) when a proper
