On Apr 8, 2008, at 8:18 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:

On Tuesday 08 April 2008 19:32:58 Bernd Schubert wrote:
Hello,

I need to set a rather huge dead time of 1200s, but the initial dead time
is supposed to be of 120s or less. However, heartbeat tries to be
schoolmasterly and doesn't want to accept my settings:

deadtime 1200 # time to declare a node dead
initdead 120  # time to declare a node dead on heartbeat startup
keepalive 120 # how often to send keepalive packets


heartbeat[6523]: 2008/04/08_19:23:16 ERROR: Initial dead time [120000] is
smaller than deadtime [1200000]
eartbeat[6523]: 2008/04/08_19:23:16 ERROR: Configuration error, heartbeat
not started.


Well, heartbeat is not startup up automatically here and even the nodes are not powered on automatically after a hard reset. So when I start heartbeat I'm activeley monitoring everything and there is absolutely no need to let me wait at least 20min on start up. I'm even not convinced a deadtime of
20min is sufficient, since this is for a Lustre cluster and Lustre
sometimes manages to create such a high load that nothing else than the
Lustre and related kernel threads do work on the system...

So pretty please, is there a setting allowing to override this ridiculous
initdead  time checking?

Doesn't look like the error can be overriden

       /* Check deadtime parameters */
       if (config->initial_deadtime_ms < config->deadtime_ms) {
               ha_log(LOG_ERR
               ,       "Initial dead time [%ld] is smaller than"
               " deadtime [%ld]"
, config->initial_deadtime_ms, config- >deadtime_ms);
               ++errcount;
       }else if (config->initial_deadtime_ms < 10000) {

Have you tried compiling a version with the "++errcount;" part commented out? Seems like a strange thing to be a fatal - unless the internal algorithms make crappy assumptions.
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to