On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Joe Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All is clear, now. > I shall now assume a RA undertaking a "STOP" or > "START" operation should itself perform a thorough > evaluation of a resource's state before AND after > doing anything that might affect the state of the > resource. > > This resource's state evaluation would involve similar > if not exactly the same verifications that the RA > would undertake while performing the MONITOR command, > at all the specified check-levels. > > I have one last question: > > Is there any chance that HB would attempt to start a > resource ***without*** ensuring that this resource is > *certified* "STOPPED" by the RA, not only on that > node, (also on the other nodes if that resource is > allowed to) ?
no. this is why we run "probes" on new cluster nodes... to make sure no service can ever be running twice > In other words, before starting a resource on a node, > for the first time after it's reboot, can we assume HB > always calls a "MONITOR" or a "STOP" to certify no > sub-resources sub-resources? > used by that resource are already > allocated ? BTW is it a "MONITOR" or a "STOP" that is > first called by HB for a resource ? > > Thank you Andrew and Dejan, for your patience and > thorough explanations. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
