On Jan 31, 2008, at 1:10 PM, Andreas Mock wrote:
Hi Dejan, hi all,
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]>
Gesendet: 31.01.08 11:08:04
An: General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]>
Betreff: Re: [Linux-HA] Monitor Retry
So the question is:
Does the resource run in a way able to fulfill it's service? (Yes/
No)
But IMHO this question implies that the RA tries/should try to do
as much
as necessary to test the service-ability. This can be pretty much.
Sometimes too much if the service is doing what it should: Working
hard!
That's why multiple levels of monitoring are available.
What do you mean with that? Are there RA out there which do
different kind
of monitoring controlled by different parameters?
You can have as many recurring monitor actions as you like.
What the RA does during them is up to it alone. There are ways to
provide hints to the RA that perhaps it should do one type of check or
another.
Timeout means: Nothing, no answer.
That's equivalent to no service. We can't say why though.
Is this the right/current interpretation?
yes, IIRC
There's still certain set of resources which are (unfortunately)
unreliable and can occasionaly timeout. I can recall some STONITH
devices which would timeout once out of a hundred times or so.
For those, a monitor failure could be considered transient.
I got a deja vu. :-))
But anyway...the stonith discussion is stuck.
Best regards
Andreas Mock
_____________________________________________________________________
Unbegrenzter Speicherplatz für Ihr E-Mail Postfach? Jetzt aktivieren!
http://www.digitaledienste.web.de/freemail/club/lp/?lp=7
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
