On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Fabio M. Di Nitto <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/13/2011 10:30 PM, Lon Hohberger wrote: >> On 10/13/2011 11:30 AM, David Teigland wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 03:41:31PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote: >>>>> cluster4 >>>>> . jid from dlm-kernel "slots" which will be assigned similarly >>>> What is the actual algorithm used to assign these slots? >>> >>> The same as picking jids: lowest unused id starting with 0. As for >>> implementation, I'll add it to the current dlm recovery messages. >>> >>> (Frankly, I'd really like to just set jid to nodeid-1. Any support for >>> that? It would obviously add a slight requirement to picking nodeid's, >>> which 99.9% of people already do.) >> >> While I think this is simple, I don't think this is the best idea. >> >> This would only work efficiently if the cluster stack only used whole >> numbers, instead of say "integer" (like native corosync). > > > Doesn't pacemaker assigns random nodes ID in the 2^31 range? IIRC there > was a long debate at some point in the area. I am sure Andrew can shed > some light here.
Pacemaker doesn't assign node IDs. But the people that configure corosync for use with Pacemaker often leave nodeid unset and get the default (a semi-random 2^31 integer)
