Hi Raoul, About the second patch which I contributed, how do you think?
Best Regards, Hideo Yamauchi. --- On Mon, 2011/11/21, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Raoul, > > Thank you for comment. > > Because postfix check did not give back the details to a result as for RA, I > recognized that the details of the log were necessary. > > I changed a check of data_directory. > And I abolish a suggestion street in front, the loop. > This is because the plural setting is not admitted because it added a check. > > Please please confirm my correction. > And please commit a correction. > > Best Regards, > Hideo Yamauchi. > > > --- On Sat, 2011/11/19, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Hideo-san! > > > > On 2011-11-16 11:36, [email protected] wrote: > > > I think that the same check has been already carried out in a resource > > > agent. > > > > > > (snip) > > > # run Postfix internal check, if not probing > > > if ! ocf_is_probe; then > > > $binary $OPTIONS check>/dev/null 2>&1 > > > ret=$? > > > if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then > > > ocf_log err "Postfix 'check' failed." $ret > > > return $OCF_ERR_GENERIC > > > fi > > > fi > > > (snip) > > > > > > > > > That means, after all is not the loop check of data_directory unnecessary? > > > > postfix check is called after all other checks have passed and, you're > > right, it also checks the required directories. > > > > i think i had some issues though: > > > # check spool/queue and data directories (if applicable) > > > # this is required because "postfix check" does not catch all errors > > > > but i cannot remember the exact problems anymore. > > > > anyways, postfix check will return a "OCF_ERR_GENERIC" > > which is regarded as a soft error (!) [1] and will > > > > a. not hint the user or a gui application to the exact problem and > > b. will lead to a restart of the failed resource on the same node > > > > > > the more in-depth check will fail with OCF_ERR_INSTALLED [2] or > > OCF_ERR_PERM [3] and will > > > > c. give more information in this regard and > > d. migrates the resource to a different node, > > which makes sense if i.e. the "shared" queue directory (nfs, etc.) > > isn't available. > > > > > > i think that this behavior is good and checking the most commonly > > modified directories separately has been very helpful in my setups. > > > > but of course, i'm open for comments. > > > > > #Sorry...Because English is weak, I may understand your opinion by > > > mistake. > > > > no worries. english isn't my first language either and until now we > > managed to work things out, right? :) > > > > cheers, > > raoul > > > > [1] > > http://www.linux-ha.org/doc/dev-guides/_literal_ocf_err_generic_literal_1.html > > [2] > > http://www.linux-ha.org/doc/dev-guides/_literal_ocf_err_installed_literal_5.html > > [3] > > http://www.linux-ha.org/doc/dev-guides/_literal_ocf_err_perm_literal_4.html > > -- ____________________________________________________________________ > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. [email protected] > > Technischer Leiter > > > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. [email protected] > > 1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030 > > FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15 > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
