From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:06:31 +0200 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: Philipp Reisner , drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] Another drbd race Message-ID: <20040907120631.GI10035@marowsky-bree.de> References: <20040819110202.GO9601@marowsky-bree.de> <200409071139.29609.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> <20040907101343.GA5638@nudl> <200409071332.02477.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200409071332.02477.philipp.reisner@linbit.com> Cc: List-Id: Coordination of development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2004-09-07T13:32:02, Philipp Reisner said: > > similar after bootup: > > we refuse to be promoted to Primary from Secondary/Unknown, > > unless we got an explicit "peer dead" confirmation by someone. > > > > does that make any sense? > > > I like it a lot! > > Thus we will not call it "drbdadm resume-io r0" but > "drbdadm peer-dead r0" The drbd proof of concept Resource Agent I wrote actually calls this command "mark-peer-dead", so we are quite in alignment ;-) Note that in particular this could be set before even drbd itself notices; which is more easily understood than getting a "resume_io" command before drbd had even suspended IO. > Also the question at the startup-user-dialog: > > Is the peer dead ? > > Is easier to get right.... Yep. It's also much easier to code for. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée -- High Availability & Clustering \\\ /// SUSE Labs, Research and Development \honk/ SUSE LINUX AG - A Novell company \\//