Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 06:33:50PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 10/12/2009 01:48 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:27:55PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> >> On 2009-10-12 13:16, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> >>> Hi Florian,
> >>>
> >>> This discussion digre
On 10/12/2009 01:48 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:27:55PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On 2009-10-12 13:16, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>>> Hi Florian,
>>>
>>> This discussion digressed, and I'm not entirely happy with the
>>> current user interface/implementation
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:27:55PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 2009-10-12 13:16, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi Florian,
> >
> > This discussion digressed, and I'm not entirely happy with the
> > current user interface/implementation. Do you intend to do
> > something about it?
>
> Cert
On 2009-10-12 13:16, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> This discussion digressed, and I'm not entirely happy with the
> current user interface/implementation. Do you intend to do
> something about it?
Certainly: I just happen to be swamped at this point. :)
I must confess I am not entir
Hi Florian,
This discussion digressed, and I'm not entirely happy with the
current user interface/implementation. Do you intend to do
something about it?
Cheers,
Dejan
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:41:35PM +0200, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Florian
On 2009-09-16T19:44:32, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Quite simple, really. ;-)
> Makes sense. I'd just like to avoid that the parameter is
> required to run monitor operation.
Right, a depth=0, nothing should change from today.
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Nove
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 06:14:13PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2009-09-16T14:56:40, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>
> > Yes, for NFS or OCFS2. But that should be covered by combining
> > the hostname with the instance name. To avoid the root directory
> > mess, I'd also suggest to create all
On 2009-09-16T18:53:45, Florian Haas wrote:
> > That isn't a good default. It'd end up cluttering the fs eventually, as
> > nothing exists to clean it up.
> Really?
> http://hg.linux-ha.org/agents/file/f8bc24bc1db4/heartbeat/Filesystem#l671
On a clean stop, yes ;-) If all stops were clean, we wo
On 2009-09-16 18:11, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>> Not sure, but I don't think so. I think it's up to the RA to
>> interpret it at will. At any rate, multiple depths may be
>> supported.
>
> Yes, it's not defined anywhere.
Thought so. :)
>>> It does. I just thought it would be helpful to see the
On 2009-09-16T14:56:40, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Yes, for NFS or OCFS2. But that should be covered by combining
> the hostname with the instance name. To avoid the root directory
> mess, I'd also suggest to create all test files in one
> subdirectory.
The admin may have a valid reason for spec
On 2009-09-16T14:41:35, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> The statusfile_prefix parameter should not affect the basic
> monitor operation. I think that if it does that will be source of
> confusion.
I don't think it will cause confusion, but it would make the "old"
behaviour unavailable; that isn't goo
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:44:13PM +0200, Dominik Klein wrote:
> Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi Florian,
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> >> Lars, Dejan,
> >>
> >> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
> >> the Filesystem
Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Lars, Dejan,
>>
>> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
>> the Filesystem RA that implements a monitor operation which checks
>> whether I/O on the mounted f
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 2009-09-16 13:29, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi Florian,
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> >> Lars, Dejan,
> >>
> >> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
On 2009-09-16 13:29, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Lars, Dejan,
>>
>> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
>> the Filesystem RA that implements a monitor operation which checks
>> whether
Hi Florian,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> Lars, Dejan,
>
> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
> the Filesystem RA that implements a monitor operation which checks
> whether I/O on the mounted filesystem is in fact possible. Any
Lars, Dejan,
as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
the Filesystem RA that implements a monitor operation which checks
whether I/O on the mounted filesystem is in fact possible. Any
suggestions for improvement would be most welcome.
Do I win the prize for the longes
17 matches
Mail list logo
