On 11/04/2013, at 6:33 AM, Brian J. Murrell <br...@interlinx.bc.ca> wrote:
> On 13-02-21 07:48 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Brian J. Murrell >> <brian-squohqy54cvwr29bmmi...@public.gmane.org> wrote: >>> I wonder what happens in the case of two racing "crm" commands that want >>> to update the CIB (with non-overlapping/conflicting data). Is there any >>> locking to ensure that one crm cannot overwrite the other's change? >>> (i.e. second one to get there has to read in the new CIB before being >>> able to apply his change and send it back) Or if there is a situation >>> where one write stomps another's, >> >> If my information is up-to-date, yes. >> >> crmsh uses a read+modify+replace cycle, if B reads after A has read >> but before the replace has happened, data will be lost. > > Does crm_resource suffer from this problem no > or does it properly only send > exactly the update to the CIB for the operation it's trying to achieve? correct > > Cheers, > b. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
