> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013, James Harper wrote: > > > Hi James, > > > > > > Here is a somewhat simpler patch; does this work for you? Note that if > > > you something like /etc/init.d/ceph status osd.123 where osd.123 isn't in > > > ceph.conf then you get a status 1 instead of 3. But for the > > > /etc/init.d/ceph status mds (or osd or mon) case where there are no > > > daemons of a particular type it works. > > > > > > Perhaps the "does not exist" check should be also modified to return 3? > > > > > > > Pacemaker will call the RA on every node to see what is running. On a node > in an asymmetric cluster where ceph isn't configured, the RA just wants to > know that it isn't running - it won't like an error being returned. For a node > without even the RA script installed it would return not-installed, but I > think > that's okay too. > > > > Do you think maybe the 'ceph status' check and the RA check have > conflicting requirements here? Maybe it would be better to leave the init.d > script as-is and build the smarts into the RA script instead. > > Maybe, but I'm not completely following what the RA's requirements are > here. If it's just a matter of the init script returning a different > error code, though (as we've done so far), I don't see any problem. >
I haven't tried your patch yet, but can it ever return 0? It seems to set it to 3 initially, and then change it to 1 if it finds an error. I can't see that it ever sets it to 0 indicating that daemons are running. Easy enough to fix by setting the EXIT_STATUS=0 after the check of daemon_is_running, I think, but it still doesn't allow for the case where there are three OSD's, one is running, one is stopped, and one is failed. The EXIT_STATUS in that case appears to be based on the last daemon checked, eg basically random. > > Do idle mds's add any load to the system? Would it be useful to be able to > > have pacemaker bring up mds's on any two nodes so you always have exactly > > two running, without actually tying them to specific nodes? > > They don't add much load when they are standby, but they will if they end > up taking over. There is also no reason to say 'exactly two' IMO. If you > have a symmetric cluster I would be more inclined to run one on every node > for simplicity, recognizing that the active one will use some resources. > Thanks for that clarification James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
