[ClusterLabs] [Question] About deletion of SysVStartPriority.
Hi All, We have a question for the next correction. * https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/a97c28d75347aa7be76092aa22459f0f56a220ff We understand it that this obeyed a correction of systemd. In Pacemaker1.1.13, SysVStartPriority=99 is set. Pacemaker1.1.12 is set, too. When we use Pacemaker1.1.12, does it have a problem to delete SysVStartPriority=99? Or must we not delete it when use Pacemaker1.1.12 and Pacemaker1.1.13? Or is it necessary to judge it by a version of systemd of the OS, and to set it? - [Unit] Description=Pacemaker High Availability Cluster Manager After=basic.target After=network.target After=corosync.service Requires=basic.target Requires=network.target Requires=corosync.service [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target [Service] Type=simple KillMode=process NotifyAccess=main #SysVStartPriority=99 (snip) - Best Regards, Hideo Yamauchi. ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [Question] About deletion of SysVStartPriority.
On 06/08/15 15:42 +0900, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: We have a question for the next correction. * https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/a97c28d75347aa7be76092aa22459f0f56a220ff We understand it that this obeyed a correction of systemd. In Pacemaker1.1.13, SysVStartPriority=99 is set. Pacemaker1.1.12 is set, too. When we use Pacemaker1.1.12, does it have a problem to delete SysVStartPriority=99? Or must we not delete it when use Pacemaker1.1.12 and Pacemaker1.1.13? Or is it necessary to judge it by a version of systemd of the OS, and to set it? It was a leftover from times systemd took that value into account (definitely not the case with systemd-218+), and yes, systemd version is the only deciding factor whether it makes sense to state the parameter in the unit file. I wouldn't expect this change will cause any issue regardless since the order at the startup/shutdown is pretty clear anyway (After/Requires). So if you want, just go for it (and let us know in case of troubles). After all, unit files are there to be tweaked by keen sysadmins like you via overrides in /etc/systemd/user :-) -- Jan (Poki) pgplSAoDUQBVd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [Question] About deletion of SysVStartPriority.
Hi Jan, Thank you for comments. When we use Pacemaker1.1.12, does it have a problem to delete SysVStartPriority=99? Or must we not delete it when use Pacemaker1.1.12 and Pacemaker1.1.13? Or is it necessary to judge it by a version of systemd of the OS, and to set it? It was a leftover from times systemd took that value into account (definitely not the case with systemd-218+), and yes, systemd version is the only deciding factor whether it makes sense to state the parameter in the unit file. I wouldn't expect this change will cause any issue regardless since the order at the startup/shutdown is pretty clear anyway (After/Requires). We delete SysVStartPriority=99 in Pacemaker1.1.12 and move it. If a problem occurs, I report it. Many Thanks! Hideo Yamauch. - Original Message - From: Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com To: users@clusterlabs.org Cc: Date: 2015/8/6, Thu 16:13 Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] [Question] About deletion of SysVStartPriority. On 06/08/15 15:42 +0900, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: We have a question for the next correction. * https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/a97c28d75347aa7be76092aa22459f0f56a220ff We understand it that this obeyed a correction of systemd. In Pacemaker1.1.13, SysVStartPriority=99 is set. Pacemaker1.1.12 is set, too. When we use Pacemaker1.1.12, does it have a problem to delete SysVStartPriority=99? Or must we not delete it when use Pacemaker1.1.12 and Pacemaker1.1.13? Or is it necessary to judge it by a version of systemd of the OS, and to set it? It was a leftover from times systemd took that value into account (definitely not the case with systemd-218+), and yes, systemd version is the only deciding factor whether it makes sense to state the parameter in the unit file. I wouldn't expect this change will cause any issue regardless since the order at the startup/shutdown is pretty clear anyway (After/Requires). So if you want, just go for it (and let us know in case of troubles). After all, unit files are there to be tweaked by keen sysadmins like you via overrides in /etc/systemd/user :-) -- Jan (Poki) ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
