On 06/14/2011 06:03 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 2011-06-14 13:08, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:32:02AM -0600, Alan Robertson wrote:
>>> On 06/13/2011 04:12 AM, Simon Talbot wrote:
>>>> A couple of observations (I am sure there are more) on the uniqueness flag
>>>> for OCF script parameters:
>>>>
>>>> Would it be wise for the for the index parameter of the SFEX ocf script to
>>>> have its unique flag set to 1 so that the crm tool (and others) would warn
>>>> if one inadvertantly tried to create two SFEX resource primitives with the
>>>> same index?
>>>>
>>>> Also, an example of the opposite, the Stonith/IPMI script, has parameters
>>>> such as interface, username and password with their unique flags set to 1,
>>>> causing erroneous warnings if you use the same interface, username or
>>>> password for multiple IPMI stonith primitives, which of course if often
>>>> the case in large clusters?
>>>>
>>> When we designed it, we intended that Unique applies to the complete set
>>> of parameters - not to individual parameters. It's like a multi-part
>>> unique key. It takes all 3 to create a unique instance (for the example
>>> you gave).
>> That makes sense.
> Does it really? Then what would be the point of having some params that
> are unique, and some that are not? Or would the tuple of _all_
> parameters marked as unique be considered unique?
>
I don't know what you think I said, but A multi-part key to a database
is a tuple which consists of all marked parameters. You just said what
I said in a different way.
So we agree.
--
Alan Robertson<al...@unix.sh>
"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship... Let me claim
from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William Wilberforce
_______________________________________________________
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/
