I am setting up a new cvs server, and this one happens to be on a set of machines using DRBD for disk mirroring and heartbeat for cluster management.
The two machines will share the same service DNS name (and IP), and which ever of them is the current master will be the one with access to the file systems on the DRBD devices. Our CVS repositories will be on one of the DRBD devices using ext3 file systems. BTW only the current master will be answering to the IP. My questions: 1) does anyone in this group already have some scripts for nicely letting cvs know it is about to lose it's lower level file systems, ready for calling in the haresources file? (hey, had to ask :) 2) on linux will a `killall cvs` cause cvs (as server for :ext: &/or :pserver:)to cleanup and exit nicely or is there a particular signal I should pass to killall? What I want is to be able to essentially tell cvs is "I know the file system is leaving, sync self and bail". 3) if a `killall cvs` is done on the the server processes what is the likely output on a cvs client on a remote system? Will the client automatically try again in a few seconds? Will it cause data corruption in the users sandbox? 4) worst case, if a user is committing and cvs is not stopped before the lower level device goes away (probably from a power fail), a partial or even full ',filename' new file could exist. a) correct??? b) does anything need to be done in one of these worst cases, (re)move file? 5) is there a more efficient way of locking the repository than creating all the `#cvs.rfl' in all the sub directories of all the repositories? That is, is there a single file I can create that blocks access to each repo for the whole repo, instead of what is suggested for backup? http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs-1.11.14/cvs_2.html#SEC24 Or should I temporarily change a soflink where the cvs bin is expected (this could be problematic if someone has the bright idea of setting CVS_SERVER to something else)? I suppose unmounting the file system will also have a locking effect, but there is a possible race between the killall and umount I think. 6) am I just over killing the effect removal of the disk from cvs will have on the server processes? -- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs