On 2011-04-15 08:23, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Florian Haas <florian.h...@linbit.com> wrote: >> Andrew, >> >> the documentation states that unless your distro ships >> dlm_controld.pcmk, you should be installing cman and running Pacemaker >> on that. I presume this is because (at least on Fedora and RHEL), cman >> ships with the standard dlm_controld that now supports Pacemaker. > > Other way around, Pacemaker 1.1.x supports cman which means it can use > the standard dlm_controld.
Gotcha. >> Now, for packagers on distros that don't ship cman, is it a viable >> option to just package dlm_controld from >> git://git.fedorahosted.org/dlm.git, and ship that to support >> Pacemaker-managed OCFS2? > > Yes. This is what SLES does and will presumably continue to do. > Err, assuming the patches are still in there. Right. I asked because SLES currently builds from Cluster 3.0.x sources iirc, which do include the .pcmk variants -- question was whether it was OK to build from current versions that just have the "standard" controld. Based on your answer I assume it is. Andres, does that answer your question from the IRC discussion we had yesterday? > There is no intention from my side to prevent the .pcmk variants from > working in the future. OK. > The only other thing to note is that eventually everything (pacemaker, > *FS, dlm_controld) will hook into the corosync quorum plugin instead > of cman or the pacemaker plugin. > > Timeline for that should be in the next year or so (after much > additional testing) IIUC. OK. Thanks! Cheers, Florian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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
