Re: [Nut-upsuser] ordered shutdown
Citeren Marco Chiappero : > Well, right, but PSP it's not intended for network use, while NUT indeed > it is. I took it as example for showing the above reason and how easy is > to choose from different criteria in a standalone environment: > http://i39.tinypic.com/2mpy9s6.png You hit the nail on the head. While it is fairly easy to change shutdown parameters in a standalone application, this is not so easy in a networked environment. In a standalone application, you can rest assured that once the shutdown condition has been reached, the system *will* go down and recovering from that is fairly straightforward too (since this will be dealt with by the UPS itself). No need to deal with transient conditions. In a networked environment with multiple shutdown levels, you'll also have to deal with transient conditions and also with the situation where the power returns between two levels (and how to recover from that) and making this system fail safe too. This is vastly more difficult to handle. > If I'm not wrong it should be pretty easy to set up ordered shutdown > with different criteria in apcupsd too. Me and some other people > reported that actually NUT can't easily cope with similar requests. Is > there something more to comment on that? Yes, there is. If extending runtime by shutting down loads is essential to you, chances are that what you really need is a generator. Most of the power outages you'll experience in everyday life will be short lived (in the order of seconds, mainly due to switching operation in the grid), which are corrected automatically. This is something that can dealt with easily with the runtime of basically any UPS in existance. Longer outages are usually mean that something is broken that can't be corrected automatically and/or requiring human intervention/replacement of systems. This means that the outage will be much longer than the runtime of UPS batteries. No matter how much load you're shedding. Even at no load, most UPS systems won't hold up longer than about 45 to 60 minutes. If you've already used up part of the juice, it will be even less. So you're systems *are* going down in that situation. If losing (some) systems is really a big deal to you, having a UPS is only part of the solution. Personally, I feel the option to shutdown part of the loads depending on battery charge or runtime remaining is largely a waste of effort. You'll still have to deal with the situation where the battery state triggers shutdown on all systems at the same time (after recovering from an outage, followed by another outage for instance). [...] > So, I'll keep waiting for the features. :-) ...instead of working toward a solution. You see where the root of this problem lies? The active developers don't have this high on their list of features and the people that want this, don't provide any help in adding them. Don't hold your breath waiting. ;-) Best regards, Arjen -- Please keep list traffic on the list ___ Nut-upsuser mailing list Nut-upsuser@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
Re: [Nut-upsuser] ordered shutdown
Arjen de Korte ha scritto: > You can configure NUT to shutdown at a certain battery.charge too, > with the UPS you're using, that's what I have been telling you a > couple of times already. But I already know it! I was just wondering why NUT works differently and lacks those features. I said I could/should even care whether the battery charge is low or not, the only thing I know is that at _event_ [battery_charge | runtime | elapsed_time] (like PSP natively and in an intuitive way does) I want to start shutdown procedure. I'd like the same freedom of choice, why only "low battery" is that relevant in NUT? That's the juice. However, never mind... >> Moreover I'd like to choose, in this low_battery - full battery range, >> when to powerdown different systems, still on different basis. > > This won't work with MGE PSP either, so the comparison doesn't hold here. Well, right, but PSP it's not intended for network use, while NUT indeed it is. I took it as example for showing the above reason and how easy is to choose from different criteria in a standalone environment: http://i39.tinypic.com/2mpy9s6.png If I'm not wrong it should be pretty easy to set up ordered shutdown with different criteria in apcupsd too. Me and some other people reported that actually NUT can't easily cope with similar requests. Is there something more to comment on that? >> However, the solution you wrote about is fine, so let's wait for >> implementation. > > Which is for a totally different thing we're talking about. Ok, it is for the whole features we were talking about. Never mind, please step over. >> Thank you again, but I have read every single piece of documentation >> aviable, I'm just waiting for the features I need ;-) > > I beg to differ here... :-( As you like, but again there's nothing that the man pages can do for the lack of ordered shutdown or different criteria and maybe powershare. So, I'll keep waiting for the features. :-) Regards, Marco Chiappero ___ Nut-upsuser mailing list Nut-upsuser@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
