On 2008-07-14T21:20:10, HIDEO YAMAUCHI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Lars,
>
> I'm sorry.
> I am not good at English. Regards,
>
> > But yes, it appears that the watchdog timeout should be less than
> > deadtime.
> However, the idea and I of you are the same.
>
> Can you reflect this demand?
> Or, should I register in Bugzilla?
Sure, feel free to file a bugzilla. I could see setting it to 2/3 of
deadtime, for starters.
But I don't see how it matters. It does not help protect data integrity,
as that is already served by fencing/stonith.
A cluster not using STONITH is not supportable, and the watchdog timer
is not sufficient for self-fencing (suicide), as it is not tied to
quorum etc.
What use case do you have where watchdog would actually help?
Regards,
Lars
--
Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
