On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Ulrich Windl <ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote: >>>> Dejan Muhamedagic <de...@suse.de> schrieb am 05.08.2011 um 08:39 in >>>> Nachricht > <20110805063900.GB31749@rondo.homenet>: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 08:23:43AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> > >>> Dejan Muhamedagic <de...@suse.de> schrieb am 04.08.2011 um 18:32 in >> Nachricht >> > <20110804163245.GA28585@rondo.homenet>: >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 05:45:16PM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> > > > Hi! >> > > > >> > > > Some RAs support OCF_CHECK_LEVEL (e.g. ocf:heartbeat:Raid1). However >> > > > the >> > > OCF_CHECK_LEVEL is not advertised in the metadata. Also, OCF_CHECK_LEVEL >> is >> > > not a global parameter (wouldn't make much sense). >> > > > >> > > > So obviously using the crm_gui one can add OCF_CHECK_LEVEL for some >> > > resource, and that seems to work. >> > > > >> > > > So far, so good. Now I tried to add more resources without an >> > > OCF_CHECK_LEVEL using the crm command line. I added the new resources to >> > > a >> >> > > group that contained resources using OCF_CHECK_LEVEL. >> > > >> > > OCF_CHECK_LEVEL is to be defined on a per-monitor basis, like >> > > this: >> > > >> > > primitive ... >> > > op monitor OCF_CHECK_LEVEL=10 interval=... >> > >> > [...] >> > >> > So, is a configuration like the following incorrect? >> > >> > primitive prm_c11_as_1_raid1 ocf:heartbeat:Raid1 \ >> > params raidconf="/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf" raiddev="/dev/md15" >> OCF_CHECK_LEVEL="1" \ >> > operations $id="prm_c11_as_1_raid1-operations" \ >> > op start interval="0" timeout="20s" \ >> > op stop interval="0" timeout="20s" \ >> > op monitor interval="60" timeout="60s" >> >> Yes. See an example here: >> >> http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Pacemaker_Explained/s- >> operation-monitor-multiple.html >> >> Though it's XML, you can see that OCF_CHECK_LEVEL is defined >> within a monitor operation. > > Amazingly "crm_verify -LV" does not report any problem however.
Because its not really an error. It simply sets the default check level for any monitor operations executed for that resource - a perfectly valid thing to do. _______________________________________________ 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
