On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 19:59:49 +0300 Andrei Borzenkov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 29.04.2019 18:05, Ken Gaillot пишет: > >> > >>> Why does not it check OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_notify? > >> > >> I was just not aware of this env variable. Sadly, it is not > >> documented > >> anywhere :( > > > > It's not a Pacemaker-created value like the other notify variables -- > > all user-specified meta-attributes are passed that way. We do need to > > document that. > > OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_notify is passed also when "notify" meta-attribute > is *not* specified, as well as a couple of others. But not all possible > attributes. And some OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_* variables that are passed do > not correspond to any user settable and documented meta-attribute, like > OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_clone. Sorry guys, now I am confused. Is it safe or not to use OCF_RESKEY_CRM_meta_notify? You both doesn't seem to agree where it comes from. Is it only a non expected side effect or is it safe and stable code path in Pacemaker we can rely on? Does it worth a patch in pgsqlms RA? Thanks, _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
