On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 12:31 +0100, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:27:38PM +0100, Holger Teutsch wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 11:46 +0100, Florian Haas wrote:
> > > On 2011-02-07 11:38, Holger Teutsch wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > As conclusion:
> > > > 1)
> > > >         Rolling HADR into the existing agent seems impossible to me or
> > > >         at least will end in a pollution of if and case statement and
> > > >         over complex logic.
> > > > 
> > > > 2)
> > > >         Adding support for a standard database in the one instance / one
> > > >         db model is feasible. As explained above this will not be
> > > >         'binary' compatible to the existing agent.
> > > > 
> > > > 3)
> > > >         The db2 agent seems to have a long and complex heritage as agent
> > > >         for different HA solutions or as standalone script so a major
> > > >         refurbishment is on my To-Do list anyhow.
> > > >         Moving common code into a helper script as 'library' to be
> > > >         shared by both agents might be an idea.
> > > >         
> > > > Opinions ?
> > > 
> > > Makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
> > > 
> > 
> > So I will go for 2) now and resubmit the agent afterwards.
> 
> Hmm, I thought that that wouldn't be compatible with the existing
> RA. Where to do you want to "add support for a standard database ..."?
> 

Will add this to the db2hadr agent. This one can be easily extended to
handle all cases of the "one instance / one db model". But then the name
"db2hadr" is no longer to the point.

db2db, db2_db or better ideas ?

Regards
Holger

_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to