Did not hear any objections to this patch; pushed.
Cheers,
Florian
- Original Message -
From: Florian Haas florian.h...@linbit.com
To: linux-ha-dev@lists.linux-ha.org
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2010 10:46:01 AM
Subject: [PATCH] Medium: IPaddr2: optionally flush kernel routing table on
Hi Dejan,
Thank you for comment.
Can you please reformat the patch. It's not minimal due to
indentation changes. So, it's hard to figure out what actually
changed.
Sorry
I seem to have failed in the making of the patch.
I made a patch again and attached it.
Please review it.
Best
On 6 October 2010 14:12, Lars Ellenberg lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 08:45:58AM +0200, Pavlos Parissis wrote:
Hi,
It was mentioned in this thread [1] that Heartbeat does care about the
content of /etc/hosts file.
That statement triggered me because in my
Thank you Dejan,
with the option --enable-fatal-warnings=no it works!
Cheers!
Nikita Michalko
Am Mittwoch, 6. Oktober 2010 16:57 schrieb Dejan Muhamedagic:
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Nikita Michalko wrote:
Hi all!
After downloading the sources
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 06:14:14PM +0200, Rasto Levrinc wrote:
On Wed, October 6, 2010 12:38 pm, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
Well, if we agree on what is left and what is right, perhaps then
we won't need it. As in:
order A B is A starts after B collocation B A is B follows A
After
On 2010-10-05T18:03:17, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
Anyway, it's too late to change the semantics as
that would change behaviour of the existing clusters.
Actually the solution is really quite easy.
1. Make constraints with 2 elements and no/insufficient brackets
produce a
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:30 -0700, AR wrote:
Solved.
the issue was that the 10.8.64.140 address was sticking to node1. I
dont know why this was happening? But once I removed the address all is
working well.
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 20:45 -0300, mike wrote:
On 10-10-06 07:09 PM, AR wrote:
I'm curious - is that 10.8.64.140 address the VIP address for the cluster?
On 10-10-07 01:21 PM, AR wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:30 -0700, AR wrote:
Solved.
the issue was that the 10.8.64.140 address was sticking to node1. I
dont know why this was happening? But once I removed the
Hi,
I have two array's of the same size available via multipath to two
machines. I would like to setup a mirror of the LV's across both PV's
but i'm worried about how well this will work in a clustered
environment. Will the mirroring function work properly with a clustered
volume group?
I'm
No, not for the cluster. It is for the socks proxy listening adapter.
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 13:52 -0300, mike wrote:
I'm curious - is that 10.8.64.140 address the VIP address for the cluster?
On 10-10-07 01:21 PM, AR wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:30 -0700, AR wrote:
Solved.
the
10 matches
Mail list logo
