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/
