On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenb...@linbit.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote: >> Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas: >> > On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote: >> >> Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof: >> >>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg >> >>> <lars.ellenb...@linbit.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote: >> >>>>> I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal. >> >>>> >> >>>> Yep, "degraded" is not a state available for pacemaker. >> >>>> Pacemaker cannot do much about "suboptimal". >> >>> >> >>> I wonder what it would take to change that. I suspect either a >> >>> crystal ball or way too much knowledge of drbd internals. >> >> >> >> The RA would be responsible to check this. For drbd any diskstate >> >> different from UpToDate/UpToDate is suboptimal. >> > >> > Have you actually looked at the resource agent? It does already evaluate >> > the disk state and adjusts the master preference accordingly. What else >> > is there to do? >> >> Maybe I misunderstood Andrew's comment. I read it this way: If we >> introduce a new state "suboptimal", would it be hard to detect it?
No, detecting is the easy part. >> I just wanted to express that detecting suboptimality seems not to be >> that hard. > > But that state is useless for pacemaker, > since it cannot do anything about it. This was the part I was wondering about - if pacemaker _could_ do something intelligent. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
