On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 03:45:10PM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 15:07, Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 08:49:52AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 08:14, HIDEO YAMAUCHI > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> >> Which operation did you cause to fail? The monitor or the fencing > >> >> operation? > >> > When I caused fencing, I generated time-out in RA of STONITH. > >> > > >> > Possibly is this phenomenon improved in Pacemaker? > >> > >> By design the crm has no idea which node or plugin is used (or were > >> tried and failed). > >> So it would be impossible to for it recover the RA on its own. > >> > >> It _may_ make sense for the stonithd to unload any plugin that reports > >> a failed stonith action (and thus causing the monitor to eventually > >> fail) but I'll leave that for Dejan to think about :-) > > > > stonithd doesn't unload any plugins depending on failed actions. > > right - it was a suggestion for a possible enhancement. > no idea if its a good idea though.
It would save some memory, not much though, but it'd also increase the code's complexity. The latter probably by far outweighs the former :) Thanks, Dejan _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
