Hi, On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 03:35:26PM -0400, Vadym Chepkov wrote: > There is some flow in start/stop and manage/unmanage logic in > the crm, in my opinion. > > For example, > > I unmanaged some resource to do maintenance, then I issued crm resource > manage again. > At this point crm will add meta is-managed="true" to the resource. > > Later on I need to upgrade pacemaker software > so I issue 'crm configure property is-managed-default=false' > and all resources will be unmanaged except those that I was "managing" before. > so I have to go into each individually and remove meta is-managed. > > And basically the same problem with target-role. > > maybe the logic should be changed and not to add a redundant meta? If the > result can be achieved without adding meta don't add it? > And add only if we add "force" option, for exampe?
Too late for that, we shouldn't change semantics. I did think about it at the time and say "resource manage rsc" seemed unequivocal. BTW, there's a way to remove a meta attribute: crm resource meta <rsc> delete <attr> Thanks, Dejan > Just a thought. > > Vadym > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf