>>> Lars Marowsky-Bree <l...@suse.com> schrieb am 20.06.2012 um 17:02 in >>> Nachricht <20120620150208.gh21...@suse.de>: > On 2012-06-20T16:37:35, Ulrich Windl <ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> > wrote: > > > so what exit code is failed? Then: With the standard logic of "stop" > > only performing when the resource is up (i.e. monitor reports > > "stopped"), a partially started resource that the monitor considers > > "stopped" may fail to be cleanly stopped on "stop". > > That "standard logic" you cite is *NOT* the standard logic. A partially > started resource must not report 'stopped', it would need to report > failed (OCF_ERR_GENERIC) - since it is neither cleanly started nor > cleanly stopped. > > See, it's simple. Any "partially" completed operation or state -> not > successful, ergo failure must be reported.
Is it correct that the standard recovery procedure for this failure is node fencing then? If so it makes things worse IMHO. > > > > My answer is not too simple - I said "failed", not "stopped" ;-) > > Maybe if you could present a skeletton of code for a resource that can > > fail partially, we could be more concrete... > > Me? *You* are constructing this use case. ;-) > > > Regards, > Lars _______________________________________________ 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
