Hi Dejan and Lars

 I send the patch which settled a conventional argument.
 1)apache-001.patch
   ->I am the same with the patch which I sent last time.
   ->It is the version that I added an option of the grep to.
 2)apache-002.patch
   ->It is a processing method using tr at the age of HB2.1.4.
 3)http-mon.sh.patch
   ->It is the patch which coupled my suggestion with A.

 1) and 2) improve malfunction at the time of the monitor processing.
 3) supports IPv6.

 The malfunction is not revised when I do not apply at least 1) or 2).
 I think that 2) plan is good, but leave the final judgment to Dejan.

Regards,
Tomo

2012年1月19日1:12 Dejan Muhamedagic <[email protected]>:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:19:58AM +0900, nozawat wrote:
>> Hi Dejna and Lars
>>
>>  When, for example, it is a logic of the examples of Lars to try both,
>>  in the case of IPv6, is the check of IPv4 that I enter every time?
>>  Don't you hate that useless processing enters every time?
>>
>>  In that case, I think that I should give a parameter such as
>> OCF_RESKEY_bindaddress.
>> ----------
>> bind_address="127.0.0.1"
>> if [ -n "$OCF_RESKEY_bindaddress" ]; then
>>   bind_address="$OCF_RESKEY_bindaddress"
>> fi
>> WGETOPTS="-O- -q -L --no-proxy --bind-address=$bind_address"
>> ----------
>
> That's fine too. We can combine yours and Lars' proposal, i.e. in
> case bindaddress is not set, it tries both. Do you think you
> could prepare such a patch?
>
> BTW, the extra processing is minimal, in particular compared to
> the rest this RA does.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dejan
>
>> Regards,
>> Tomo
>>
>> 2012年1月17日23:28 Dejan Muhamedagic <[email protected]>:
>> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:41:41AM +0100, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:07:09AM +0900, nozawat wrote:
>> >> > Hi Dejan and Lars,
>> >> >
>> >> > I send the patch which I revised according to indication of Lars.
>> >> >
>> >> > >> OK. I guess that this won't introduce a regression. And I guess
>> >> > >> that sometimes one may need a newline in the test string.
>> >> > I seemed to surely take such a step in the past.
>> >> > However, I thought that the tr processing was deleted that load became 
>> >> > higher.
>> >> > Therefore I used the -z option.
>> >>
>> >> Thinking about it, maybe to reduce chance of regression,
>> >> we can try both?
>> >> I'm not sure about the default order, ipv4 or ipv6 first?
>> >>
>> >> for bind_address in 127.0.0.1 ::1 ; do
>> >>       wget ...
>> >>       ret=$?
>> >>       [ $ret = 0 ] && break;
>> >>       # recent wget could [ $ret != 4 ] && break,
>> >>       # "Network error". But older wget return 1...
>> >> done
>> >>
>> >> Dejan?
>> >
>> > Yes, that looks like the best way.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Dejan
>> >
>> >> --
>> >> : Lars Ellenberg
>> >> : LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
>> >> : DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com
>> >>
>> >> DRBD(R) and LINBIT(R) are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
>> >> _______________________________________________________
>> >> 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/
>> _______________________________________________________
>> 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/

Attachment: apache-001.patch
Description: Binary data

Attachment: apache-002.patch
Description: Binary data

Attachment: http-mon.sh.patch
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________________
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