Hi Andrew,

Thank you for comment.

We discussed it about this matter a little. 
The revision of the output of the log withdraws it for the moment.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.


--- Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:03 AM,  <renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp> wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Thank you for comment.
> >
> >> Why not simply remove the if(was_processing_error) &#65533;block?
> >> Its just a summary message, the place that set was_processing_error
> >> will also have logged an error.
> >
> > Is this meaning to abolish the next code?
> 
> Right.
> Though I still don't see what good it does to remove it :-)
> 
> 2 errors vs. 1.
> 
> >
> > - &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; 
> > if(was_processing_error) {
> > - &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; 
> > &#65533; &#65533;
&#65533; crm_err("Transition %d:"
> > - &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; 
> > &#65533; &#65533;
&#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; " ERRORs found during PE 
processing."
> > - &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; 
> > &#65533; &#65533;
&#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; " PEngine Input stored in: %s",
> > - &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; 
> > &#65533; &#65533;
&#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; transition_id, filename);
> > -
> > &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533; &#65533;} 
> > else
if(was_processing_warning) {
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> >
> >
> > --- Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:47 AM, &#65533;<renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp> wrote:
> >> > Hi Andrew,
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for comment.
> >> >
> >> >> np :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Maybe it would be easier to show the logs and/or crm_mon output with
> >> >> and without the patch.
> >> >
> >> > However, our many users watch error log.
> >> > And some users do not like trouble to be notified of in error log in 
> >> > this situation.
> >> >
> >> > After all is this patch too special?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure, I'm still trying to figure out what it does.
> >> It does seem like a lot of effort to go to reduce the number of logs
> >> containing ERROR: by 1.
> >>
> >> Why not simply remove the if(was_processing_error) &#65533;block?
> >> Its just a summary message, the place that set was_processing_error
> >> will also have logged an error.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> >> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> >>
> >> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> >> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> >> Bugs: 
> >> http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> >
> > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> > Bugs: 
> > http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> 
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: 
> http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
> 


_______________________________________________
Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker

Reply via email to