On 2007-02-22T06:41:14, Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> But, they are MUCH less timing critical.
> 
> One should be able to trust that they in turn are being monitored, and
> will be restarted if they misbehave.  [If that isn't an true, then it
> should be ;-)].

crmd and ccmd both have timeouts on the network which are critical.

> As a result, although failovers might be _slow_ in a serious memory
> overload condition, they should still occur.  One could also lock a
> process into memory without setting realtime priority - which would fix
> the problem in a much less dangerous way (cl_make_realtime can do that).
>  Unfortunately, it ALSO means these process would have to be started as
> root :-(

Yes, they probably need to be locked into memory at least. That was
mostly what I wanted to refer to, actually. Write-out path blocking and
all that.


> [[I know about (for example) the bug in the CCM - where it isn't
> treating timeouts correctly - but that's a bug, not a broken policy -
> and one shouldn't change policy to fix a bug.  You're talking policy
> here, if I understood correctly.]]

Uhm, the CCM timeout issue has nothing to do with this, I don't see the
connection at all.



_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to