I'm working with the pre-release from top of tree in the git repository, I've 
noticed that ya'll dont want bug reports...yet, but best I post this before its 
stale. If you would prefer me to use a different list, please indicate so/and 
or forward it. 

Until then, I thought I'd ask a couple questions and make observations 
1) Question: 
When is it thought that drbd9 goes in to the mainline kernel ? ( I hate kmods 
but drbd9 is too promising to resisit) 

2) Observation: 
(from a git-clone) you cannot build centos(6.5) /fedora (19) rpms due to a 
missing config.h.in not in ...user I copied the one in 
....user/legacy/config.h.in and 
had to alter the copied file to provide the #define for DRBD_RUN_DIR was 
missing causing registry.c not to compile. so I added 
.... 
/* Local state directory. Commonly /var/run/drbd */ 
#undef DRBD_RUN_DIR 
... 
to the file (mind you cant build if you alter the one in legacy without doing a 
commit or hacking the makefile,but doesnt matter as it appears the config.h 
there is regenerated by the one in the higher level) 

3) Observation: 
I found the deeply buried references to the man pages being pre-processed in 
the tarball but not in the git-clone, due to the need for a full docbook chain, 
but I was not able to locate a native setup for CentOS/RHEL 6.5 that would work 
so I dumped the git clone and was able to get the tarball 
"drbd-9.0.0pre7.tar.gz" to generate the RPM's for it (mind Fedora Core 19, has 
the docbook chain setup correctly, so making the man pages there was simple) In 
CentOS 6.5 x86_64 the RPM's cant be built due to an inadequate/ 
missing/improperly configured Docbook chain (Stock CentOS6.5 + eclipse and 
development groups)"""/usr/bin/xsltproc \ 
--xinclude --stringparam variablelist.term.break.after 1 \ 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/manpages/docbook.xsl 
drbdsetup.xml 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/common/en.xml:207: parser 
error : AttValue: ' expected 
ĞğĠġĢģƓɠǤǥǦǧǴǵḠḡHhĤĥĦħȞȟɦḢḣḤḥḦḧḨḩḪḫ 
""" 

4) Question: 
The pacemaker ocf resouce agents provided by the tarball are replacments for 
the existing ones supporting drbd? (I havent installed yet, so if they are in a 
linbit provider ra directory I'll adjust) The reason I ask this: The existing 
ocf drbd resource agent does not handle multi-homed hosts well as it relies on 
uname to get the hosts name, to query status for the monitor and promote 
functions instead of identifyng the nodes through drbd.conf (as I think it 
should be) As all my cluster traffic/replication is on a 10G private net, with 
static IP's and a private "domain", the ocf agent will pull my WAN facing name, 
based on uname, not the internal node name inside the private cluster space. If 
I manage to find the time to clean that up, do I send it up to you or to the 
ocf maintainers for review/possible inclusion? 

5) Last Question: 
Anyone else trying a three node CentOS/RHEL 6.5 DRBD9 backed cluster? (three 
nodes replicating to each other?) 


Regards 
Chuck 



_______________________________________________
drbd-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user

Reply via email to