>Also, I forgot about the undocumented/unsupported start-delay operation
>attribute, that you can put on the status operation to delay the first
>monitor. That may give you the behavior you want.
I have try to add "start-delay=60s" to monitor operation. The first monitor was
really delayed as
On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 22:46 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
>
>
> >Another possibility would be to have the start return immediately,
> and
> >make the monitor artificially return success for the first 10
> minutes
> >after starting. It's hacky, and it depends on your situation whether
> >the behavior is
Hi!
Not saying that the use of start-delay in the monitor-operations is
a good thing. It should in most cases be definitely better to delay
the return of start till a monitor would succeed. Have seen discussion
about deprecating start-delay - don't know the current state though.
But this case -
>Another possibility would be to have the start return immediately, and
>make the monitor artificially return success for the first 10 minutes
>after starting. It's hacky, and it depends on your situation whether
>the behavior is acceptable.
I tried to put the sleep into the monitor function,(
01.11.2017 17:20, Ken Gaillot wrote:
On Sat, 2017-10-28 at 01:11 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
Thank you for your response! This means that there shoudn't be long
"sleep" in ocf script.
If my service takes 10 minite from service starting to healthcheck
normally, then what shoud I do?
That is a tough
On Sat, 2017-10-28 at 01:11 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
>
> Thank you for your response! This means that there shoudn't be long
> "sleep" in ocf script.
> If my service takes 10 minite from service starting to healthcheck
> normally, then what shoud I do?
That is a tough situation with no great answer.
Thank you for your response! This means that there shoudn't be long "sleep" in
ocf script.
If my service takes 10 minite from service starting to healthcheck normally,
then what shoud I do?
Thank you very much!
> Hi,
> If I remember correctly, any pending actions from a previous transition
>
Hi,
If I remember correctly, any pending actions from a previous transition
must be completed before a new transition can be calculated. Otherwise,
there's the possibility that the pending action could change the state
in a way that makes the second transition's decisions harmful.
Theoretically
I have two clone resources in my corosync/pacemaker cluster. They are fm_mgt
and logserver. Both of their RA is ocf. fm_mgt takes 1 minute to start the
service(calling ocf start function for 1 minite). Configured as below：
# crm configure show
node 168002177: 192.168.2.177
node 168002178:
I have two clone resources in my corosync/pacemaker cluster. They are fm_mgt
and logserver. Both of their RA is ocf. fm_mgt takes 1 minute to start the
service(calling ocf start function for 1 minite). Configured as below：
# crm configure show
node 168002177: 192.168.2.177
node 168002178:
10 matches
Mail list logo
