On 2006-05-21T07:13:16, Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<tangent>
> Lars has always wanted RAs to time themselves (which I thought was
> madness), so he may disagree with us on this.
If you can't represent me correctly, please do not at all ;-) I prefer
to speak for myself.
I said that there's value in RAs having time-outs on the (possibly
blocking) external commands they run in some cases, and then might
escalate to a more forceful way of, say, shutting down a resource
instance. (ask nicely, ask with force, kill processes - the Oracle
database agent for FailSafe had such logic.)
That's got nothing to do with the current discussion, though.
</tangent>
> Do they show up in the normal namespace now?
Yes. That's a "bug" though, they shouldn't.
> >And even the compatibility shouldn't be too bad since the LRM gets
> >these values from the CRM not the parameter list.
> The one I know shows up is "target_role". This is kind of annoying in
> the GUI. So in my thinking (futile and clouded though it is), it's the
> example I tend to have in mind.
Now that I think of it some more, whether the GUI learns to treat a
meta_attributes section differently or treat attributes starting with
"crm_meta_" differently probably doesn't matter one way or the other.
But, how to describe defaults for these in the RA metadata then?
Probably ought to go into the <special tag="heartbeat-2.0"/> section in
the metadata then :-/
Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée
--
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
