From: Ryan O'Hara <rohara@redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] fence_scsi - Configuration file
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 11:19:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090803161944.GD26317@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A77035F.60209@redhat.com>
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 05:33:51PM +0200, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Ryan O'Hara napsal(a):
>> What happens if we list devices and have auto_detect set to 'on'? Will
>> we ignore the devices? With this auto_detect parameter, it seems that
>> it will have to be explicitly set to 'off' and devices will have to be
>> listed if we want to avoid auto-detect. Also, what happens if I set
>> auto_detect to 'off' and I don't list any devices?
>>
>
> autodetect set to "on" can have one of these two consequences:
> - Ignore listed device - read only global sections for parameters
^^ I think this is the most logical thing to do.
> - Ignore listed device but use per device parameters in case we will
> find this device by old method - This is what is implemented now
> - Use merge of listed devices and autodetected device
>
> autodetect is by default off. When we not have config file, it will
> become on. When no devices is listed -> we turn it on
Shouldn't auto_detect be default on? We want fence_scsi to work like
it does now unless it is configured otherwise. I was thinking ...
- If not config file exists, auto_detect is on.
- If a config file does exists and auto_detect is not defined to be
off, auto_detect should default to on ... regardless of whether or
not any devices are listed.
> I hope nobody will ever set autodetect to off and don't list any device,
> but we can do two things:
> - Ignore this flag and use vgs (this is what code does now)
> - Do what user want -> no device fencing
If this evern happens, the node will not register with any
devices. There are two possible outcomes:
1. If a reservation already exists (being held by another node/key),
the node in question won't have write access to the device(s) since it
didn't register with anything.
2. If a reservation does not already exist, nothing changes and the
node is completely unprotected and there is no way to fence it.
I suppose there is a third case where the node is already registered,
so doing nothing is valid, but this is just pure luck.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-03 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-30 14:08 [Cluster-devel] fence_scsi - Configuration file Jan Friesse
2009-08-03 15:14 ` Ryan O'Hara
2009-08-03 15:33 ` Jan Friesse
2009-08-03 16:19 ` Ryan O'Hara [this message]
2009-08-04 11:14 ` Jan Friesse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090803161944.GD26317@redhat.com \
--to=rohara@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).