Hi,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 03:32:00PM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I wanted to report that the initial probe of ocf_heartbeat:Xinetd reports a
> "down" status when actually the sresource is "up"
> (resource-agents-1.0.3-0.10.1 of SLES11 SP1):
The RA relies on the existence of the status file, i.e. what you
quoted below. If the service is running, but the file is
missing, then it is going to be reported as down.
> When the service file contains "disable = no", the status is reported as
> "down".
Wrong, the status depends exclusively on the existence of the
PIDFILE.
> This is bacasue the status is partially determined on the string "disable"
> anywhere is the service file,
The description should be updated to note that the configuration
file content must be canonized. There's even some code to check
the validity of the configuration file, but it's used only for
validate-all.
> and partially the status is determined depending on the existence of some
> "PIDFILE" (which isn't actually a PIDFILE):
Yeah, turns out it's not, but just a status file.
> xup_status () {
> if [ -f $PIDFILE ]; then
> echo running
> return $OCF_SUCCESS
> else
> echo stopped
> return $OCF_NOT_RUNNING
> fi
> }
>
> In some way this RA works, but it's far from being perfect. If in doubt, just
> call your xinetd service "disabler" ;-)
I'm going to rename PIDFILE to STATUSFILE or similar and update
the description.
This RA could certainly be improved. Patches welcome!
Thanks,
Dejan
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
