Hi Andrew,
Thank you for comment.
> I doubt it, I think development on heartbeat is at an end and
> maintenance is limited to regressions.
We understand it enough.
However, it is very difficult for us to wait for corosync to be stable.
> But maybe lge would like to comment further.
Well.
Let
Hi Holger,
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 05:10:13PM +0200, Holger Teutsch wrote:
> Dejan,
> I see.
> I guess the remaining task is to cleanup all stonith agents to
> let them pass password parameters to underlying tools in the
> most concealed way. In the case of IPMI the underlying tool is
> ipmitool.
Dejan,
I see.
I guess the remaining task is to cleanup all stonith agents to let them pass
password parameters to underlying tools in the most concealed way. In the case
of IPMI the underlying tool is ipmitool. At least since 1.8.2 released in 2005
passing the password via an environment variabl
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:20 AM, wrote:
> Hi Developers of Heartbeat,
>
> When we combined Pacemaker with Heartbeat, we understand that Quorum control
> does not work well.
>
> For example, it occurs when a cluster consisted of plural nodes when I set it
> besides
> no-quorum-policy=ignore.
>
>
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 09:03:37AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 2010-08-25 16:14, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Many thanks for the patch, but we have to go another route for
> > this issue. It'd be a big effort to provide the same for all
> > stonith plugins. The basic idea is to enhance lr
On 2010-08-25 16:14, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Many thanks for the patch, but we have to go another route for
> this issue. It'd be a big effort to provide the same for all
> stonith plugins. The basic idea is to enhance lrmd to be able to
> read parameters from a file instead of the usual set of
