Mailing List Archive

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:28:42PM -0600, Alan Robertson wrote:
> Earlier I mentioned the problem with portreserve (which was apparently
> ignored?)

No.
But I cached a cold.
And you did not send a patch, did you?

> Now I have run into another problem. When you set LRM parameters in
> /etc/sysconfig, the code assumes that the LRM will start within 20
> seconds of starting heartbeat. That is not the case.

lrmd was changed to getenv() it's max-children meanwhile.

You need to cherry pick that patch, or update glue.

--
: Lars Ellenberg
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com

DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

On 03/30/2012 04:58 PM, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:28:42PM -0600, Alan Robertson wrote:
>> Earlier I mentioned the problem with portreserve (which was apparently
>> ignored?)
> No.
> But I cached a cold.
Sorry to hear that :-(. Hope you're feeling better now. You have my
full sympathies - since I had bronchitis that lasted over two weeks.
> And you did not send a patch, did you?
Good point. Sorry to be a whiner... I was hoping for a little more
conversation in any case.
>> Now I have run into another problem. When you set LRM parameters in
>> /etc/sysconfig, the code assumes that the LRM will start within 20
>> seconds of starting heartbeat. That is not the case.
>>
>> lrmd was changed to getenv() it's max-children meanwhile.
>>
>> You need to cherry pick that patch, or update glue.
Good to hear that's changed. I put a patch of my own into my local copy
- just extending the loop and making it not print those annoying '.'s or
delay startup while waiting. So, I'm good locally - and there's no need
for a patch for the future.

I guess I need to make a workspace so I can submit patches properly (as
you noted above).

On the other hand, the good news though is that by upping that limit to
16 and switching from a group to explicit dependencies, the failover
time was cut from about 60 seconds to about 18 seconds - so I'm happy.


--
Alan Robertson<alanr@unix.sh> - @OSSAlanR

"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship... Let me claim from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William Wilberforce
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/