[email protected] napsal(a):
Hi All,
I thank for release of corosync2.3.5.
We used the "rrp_mode:active" setting so far.
The "rrp_mode: active" did not seem to be recommended when I saw release note
of corosync2.3.5.
What is the cause that was not recommended from this time?
It was actually never recommended, only change it's now noted in the man
page.
In addition, is there a point to be careful about when we continue using
"ative"?
Only (but big) problem with active is that active doesn't make progress
if one of link fails until link is marked as failed. Passive always
makes progress (= works) even link is failed and failure is not yet
detected.
But as long as you are happy with rrp active, use active.
Regards,
Honza
* We want to know a problem and the influence that were not recommended in
detail.
Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
