Coincidentally, the documentation for the pcmk_host_check default was recently updated for the upcoming 2.0.3 release. Once the release is out, the online documentation will be regenerated, but here is the text:
Default ------- static-list if either pcmk_host_list or pcmk_host_map is set, otherwise dynamic-list if the fence device supports the list action, otherwise status if the fence device supports the status action, otherwise none On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 11:01 +0100, wf...@niif.hu wrote: > Roger Zhou <zz...@suse.com> writes: > > > On 11/3/19 12:56 AM, wf...@niif.hu wrote: > > > > > Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > > According to documentation, pcmk_host_list is used only if > > > > pcmk_host_check=static-list which is not default, by default > > > > pacemaker > > > > queries agent for nodes it can fence and fence_scsi does not > > > > return > > > > anything. > > > > > > The documentation is somewhat vague here. The note about > > > pcmk_host_list > > > says: "optional unless pcmk_host_check is static-list". It does > > > not > > > state how pcmk_host_list is used if pcmk_host_check is the > > > default > > > dynamic-list, > > > > The confusion might be because of "the language barrier". > > > > My interpretation is like this: > > > > 1. pcmk_host_list is used only if pcmk_host_check is static-list. > > > > 2. pcmk_host_check's default is dynamic-list. > > That means, by default pcmk_host_list is not used at all. > > But this interpretation does not align with reality: > > > > but I successfully use such setups with Pacemaker 1.1.16 > > > with fence_ipmilan. > > (I mean I don't set pcmk_host_check on my fence_ipmilan resources, > only > pcmk_host_list, and they work.) > > Unless: > > > > the behavior is different in 2.0.1 (the version in Debian > > > buster). > > That's why I asked: > > > > Ram, what happens if you set pcmk_host_check to static-list? > > Of course the developers are most welcome to chime in with their > intentions and changes concerning this, I haven't got the time to dig > into the core right now. Tough I'm very much interested for my own > sake > as well, because I'm about to bring up a buster cluster with very > similar config. -- Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
