Andrew, On 2009-05-25 18:16, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> To instead defer that task to a Pacemaker resource agent seems >> positively disturbing. > > No more disturbing than #2 and what are the recurring monitor > operations if not a "cron" job?
It is not _much_ more disturbing than #2. But it seems to me like going upstairs to second floor from first, in order to fix a problem in the basement. >>> I think the best solution is to work with upstream to get the feature >>> working properly. >> That I fully agree with. The question is what "working properly" means >> in this case -- should it be capable of auto-recovery, or should it not? > > Absolutely. Its both pointless and useless if it doesn't. OK. Cheers, Florian _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
