Hi Xia and Jiaju,
Because RA may read an unintended file, I think that it is better to
check the existence of lockfile in RA. I detailed a previous mail.
What do you think about this?
If you agrees to this, Could you fix RA?
Sincerely,
Yuichi
2013/2/25 Yuichi SEINO <seino.clust...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Jiaju,
>
> 2013/2/22 Jiaju Zhang <jjzh...@suse.de>:
>> On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 16:26 +0900, Yuichi SEINO wrote:
>>> Hi Jiaju,
>>>
>>> I am testing this patch.
>>> When a lockfile was removed, it seems that the stop of RA isn't a
>>> intended behavior.
>>
>> I'm just curious how the lockfile was removed. Basically the existence
>> of the lockfile shows one boothd is started, and prevent being wrongly
>> started again. So the lockfile should not be removed intentionally by
>> the admin.
>
> I used how to run "mv" to the pid file.
>
> The other case also is the same situation. When we already run
> "boothd -l other.pid" on node, the lockfile exists in the other place.
> So, $lockfile doesn't exist in the start and stop of RA.
>
> I think that it is better to take account of the existence of
> lockfile or $pidnum, because /proc/cmdline may happen to fulfill this
> if. For example, anything RA includes the check if pid is the empty.
>
> anything_status() {
> if test -f "$pidfile"
> then
> if pid=`getpid $pidfile` && [ "$pid" ] && kill -s 0 $pid
> then
> return $OCF_SUCCESS
> else
> # pidfile w/o process means the process died
> return $OCF_ERR_GENERIC
> fi
> else
> return $OCF_NOT_RUNNING
> fi
> }
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jiaju
>>
>
> Sincerely,
> Yuichi
>
--
Yuichi SEINO
METROSYSTEMS CORPORATION
E-mail:seino.clust...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
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
