On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <l...@suse.com> wrote: > On 2012-12-06T20:10:42, Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote: > >> > To be honest, *I* couldn't figure out what "failure-delegate" would mean >> > here. "So, the child delegates its failures to the parent as part of the >> > child being ordered after the parent? Uh? How's that making sense?" >> > ;-) >> No, its a resource (meta) attribute, not a constraint option. >> Any failures get delegated to the named resource. >> >> Am am at least heartened that Yan knew what I was talking about :) > > ;-) Still, the normal (to me, at least) thinking would be "OK, so the VM > is the container. And then a rsc running/being monitored within the > container *delegates* its failure upwards?"
The direction is irrelevant. You're can delegate it anywhere you like, but in this case it would be to the vm. > It does confuse me. > > And, where you've lost me for a bit - are you know speaking up against > an attribute on the order constraint, or are you proposing something in > addition? I'm saying if you have this you don't need an attribute on the ordering constraint. > > > Regards, > Lars > > -- > Architect Storage/HA > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, > HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) > "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ 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 Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org