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/