Hi Florian,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 08:25:30AM +0200, Florian Haas wrote:
> Lars, Dejan,
>
> as discussed on #linux-ha yesterday, I've pushed a small changeset to
> the Filesystem RA that implements a monitor operation which checks
> whether I/O on the mounted filesystem is in fact possible. Any
> suggestions for improvement would be most welcome.
IMO, the monitor operation is now difficult to understand. I
don't mean the code, I didn't take a look at the code yet, but
the usage. Also, as soon as you set the statusfile_prefix
parameter, the 0 depth monitor changes behaviour. I don't find
that good. The basic monitor operation should remain the same and
just test if the filesystem is mounted as it always used to.
The new parameter should influence only the monitor operations of
higher (deeper :) depth. So, I'd propose to have two depths, say
10 and 20, of which the first would be just the read test and the
second read-write.
Finally, the statusfile_prefix should be optional for deeper
monitor operations and default to .${OCF_RESOURCE_INSTANCE}. If
OCF_RESOURCE_INSTANCE doesn't contain the clone instance, then we
should append the clone instance number (I suppose that it's
available somewhere).
I hope that this way the usage would be more straightforward. At
least it looks so to me.
> Do I win the prize for the longest changeset description or what? ;)
We need good documentation. I think it's great to write such
descriptions :)
Cheers,
Dejan
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
