On 15.10.2021 09:24, Klaus Wenninger wrote:
> Main pain-point here is that ping-RA allows us to configure the count of
> pings sent, but it
> is just using the exit-value from ping that becomes negative already when
> one of the
> answers is missing.
Looking closer, this is not true. This is
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 12:01 PM Andrei Borzenkov
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 9:25 AM Klaus Wenninger
> wrote:
>
> > Main pain-point here is that ping-RA allows us to configure the count of
> pings sent, but it
> > is just using the exit-value from ping that becomes negative already
> when
>>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 15.10.2021 um 12:00 in
Nachricht
:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 9:25 AM Klaus Wenninger
wrote:
>
>> Main pain‑point here is that ping‑RA allows us to configure the count of
pings
> sent, but it
>> is just using the exit‑value from ping that becomes negative already
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 9:25 AM Klaus Wenninger wrote:
> Main pain-point here is that ping-RA allows us to configure the count of
> pings sent, but it
> is just using the exit-value from ping that becomes negative already when one
> of the
> answers is missing.
Use fping instead? Which is
Oh well, pingd is interesting:
My guess is that it was originally designed to check the connectivity of an
interface by pinging some hosts. but some people seem to use it to check the
reachability of a specific host.
Regardless of the number of packets being sent, some non-binary behavior would
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:51 PM martin doc wrote:
>
>
> --
> *From: *Andrei Borzenkov , Friday, 15 October 2021
> 4:59 AM
> *...*
> > Dampening defines delay before attributes are committed to CIB.
> > Private attributes are never ever written into CIB, so dampening
>>> martin doc schrieb am 14.10.2021 um 22:51 in Nachricht
:
...
>
> If I understand this correctly then this probably makes every documented
> example of using ocf:pacemaker:ping with a colocation statement wrong because
> the only way to see the effect of dampen is to use a rule that
>>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 14.10.2021 um 19:59 in
Nachricht <26c9cb42-b744-11a3-4f77-7856b5618...@gmail.com>:
...
> This applies even to deleting attribute.
>
> Somewhat interesting is that it is apparently not possible to change
> attribute type at all. The very first command that creates
