Hi Andrew,
that's fine for me even in two steps , but I don't recognize the command 
to be used
to set

rsc.managed=false + rsc.op.enabled=false

  is it a special crm syntax ?

Thanks again.
Alain

Le 27/03/2013 10:00, Andrew Beekhof a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Moullé Alain <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi
>> Thanks but I never asked "to run monitoring on an unmanaged resource "
>> ... ? !
>> I ask for the opposite : a way to set one resource in a state near to
>> "umanage",
>> meaning "umanaged and wo monitoring", and wo to be forced to set all the
>> cluster-management umanaged with maitenance-mode=true.
>>
>> I think that, with regards to the responses, this function does not
>> exist ...
> rsc.managed=false + rsc.op.enabled=false
>
> but not in a single step, no
>
>> Alain
>> Le 27/03/2013 08:24, Ulrich Windl a écrit :
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I see little sense to run monitoring on an unmanaged resource, specifically 
>>> as
>>> some _monitoring_ operations are not strict read-only, but do change the 
>>> state
>>> of a resource (which may be quite unexpected). One example is the RAID RA,
>>> which tries to re-add missing devices.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ulrich
>>>
>>>>>> Moullé Alain<[email protected]> schrieb am 27.03.2013 um 07:56 in
>>> Nachricht
>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>> Hi
>>>> OK thanks, but sorry it was not quite the response I was expected as I
>>>> already know
>>>> all that about cleanup, reprobe, etc.  So more clearly my question was :
>>>> Is there a way by crm to invalidate the monitoring temorarily for one
>>>> specific resource ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Alain
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:25:54 +0100 Moullé Alain <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I've tested two things :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1/ if we set maintenance-mode=true :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         all the configured ressources become 'unmanaged' , as displayed
>>>>>> with crm_mon
>>>>>>         ok start stop are no more accepted
>>>>>>         and it seems that ressources are no more monitored any more by
>>>>>> pacemaker
>>>>> Probably maintainance-mode also tells the cluster-manager to completely
>>>>> stop monitoring.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2/ if we target only one resource via the crm resource umanage
>>>>>> <resname> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         it is also displayed unmanage with crm_mon
>>>>>>         ok start stop are no more accepted
>>>>>>         BUT pacemaker always monitors the resource
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a reason for this difference ?
>>>>> Its un-managed, not un-monitored ;-)
>>>>> Actually this is not a problem, it will monitor as long as the service
>>>>> is up. As the first monitor-action fails, the resource is marked as
>>>>> "failed" and no more monitor action is run. Until you explicitely ask
>>>>> for it with "cleanup <resource>" or "reprobe <node>".
>>>>>
>>>>> Have fun,
>>>>>
>>>>> Arnold
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to