On 01/07/2013, at 10:06 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote:
> 01.07.2013 14:53, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> >> On 01/07/2013, at 9:45 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote: >> >>> 01.07.2013 14:14, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>> ... >>>>>> I'm yet to be convinced that having two PDUs is helping those people in >>>>>> the first place. >>>>>> If it were actually useful, I suspect more than two/three people would >>>>>> have asked for it in the last decade. >>>>> >>>>> I'm just silently waiting for this to happen. >>>> >>>> Rarely a good plan. >>> >>> ok, then here is my +1 :) >>> >>>> Better to make my life so miserable that implementing it seems like a >>>> vacation in comparison :) >>> >>> :) >>> >>>> >>>>> Although I use different fencing scheme (and plan to use even more >>>>> different one), that is very nice fall-back path for me. And I strongly >>>>> prefer all complexities like reboot -> off-off-on-on to be hidden from >>>>> the configuration. Naturally, that is task for the entity which has >>>>> whole picture of what to do - stonithd. Just my 'IMHO'. >>>> >>>> If the tides of public opinion change, then yes, stonithd is the place. >>> >>> It would be natural. >>> >>>> But I can't justify the effort for only a handful of deployments. >>> >>> I do not use that only because I never used rgmanager, and that setup >>> was not supported in pacemaker. If it was, I'd build my clusters in a >>> different way, without need to reinvent a wheel. So, probably you may >>> look from the other side - nobody uses unimplemented features but >>> willing to use them once implemented. >> >> Yes, but people around here also tend to be quite vocal when they think >> something is missing. >> More so if its something critical. > > ok, that is not critical (for me), there are always ways to work around. > F.e. I plan (and I already did all hardware modifications, the only > remaining part is an agent) to sit on reset lines (like rcd_serial does) > with quido device from papouch (www.papouch.com) as a second-level > fencing mech in addition to ipmi. > > But, that would be nice to have feature if reboot command translation to > multiple devices is implemented. And I would use it. Well its possible right now, it "just" not super pretty to configure. You should be able to leave out the location constraints though, that reduces the size a lot. And if people start using it, then we might look at simplifying it. _______________________________________________ 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
