On 2012-11-11T18:55:48, Dejan Muhamedagic <deja...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> There's also one aspect which we didn't consider (or I missed
> it). The new "container" element cannot be part of a group,
> whereas if the monitor op is extended there wouldn't be such a
> constraint.
If we map it to an attribute on an existing dependency type or make it a
new one (I prefer the former right now), that seems to work as a design
too.
The containers could be part of a group then and still have additional
monitors.
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________
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://bugs.clusterlabs.org
