On 09/21/2016 02:23 AM, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote: > First of all, is there a use case for when fence-after-3-failures is a > useful behavior? I seem to recall some case where someone expected that > to be the behavior and were surprised by how pacemaker works, but that > problem wouldn't be helped by adding another option for them not to know > about.
I think I've most often encountered it with ignore/block. Sometimes users have one particular service that's buggy and not really important, so they ignore errors (or block). But they would like to try restarting it a few times first. I think fence-after-3-failures would make as much sense as fence-immediately. The idea behind restarting a few times then taking a more drastic action is that restarting is for the case where the service crashed or is in a buggy state, and if that doesn't work, maybe something's wrong with the node. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
