[Pacemaker] Pacemaker 1.0.x, Debian, and upgrades from Heartbeat 2.1.x

[Andrew Beekhof]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Florian Haas <florian.haas at linbit.com> wrote:
> Andrew and everyone,
>
> apologies upfront if this is turning into a rant. This has been somewhat
> bothering me for a while.
>
> A bit of backdrop.
>
> - The docs
> (http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/apes03s02.html)
> have claimed for a while that Pacemaker 1.0.x is compatible with
> Heartbeat 2.1.3 (aka Pacemaker 0.6). Thus it ought to be safe to expect
> to be able to do rolling upgrades from 2.1.3/2.1.4 to 1.0.x.

Yes, I anticipated it too when I was releasing 1.0.0
In fairness the wiki has been correct since April when I encountered the issue.

[snip]

> Because, quoting from the documentation, rolling upgrades are "currently
> broken between Pacemaker 0.6.x and 1.0.x. If there is sufficient demand,
> the work to repair 0.6 -> 1.0 compatibility will be carried out."
>
> I firmly believe there is sufficient demand. I therefore ask that this
> breakage be fixed. Perhaps other Debian users can second that request of
> mine.

What I don't understand, if such demand exists, is why I'm not hearing
more about it.
Since 1.0.0 came out over a year ago, I've had exactly 4 people
complain about the problem (and only half of those had actually
performed an upgrade and encountered the problem).

I even explicitly pointed out the problem and asked for people's
feedback as to whether it was important.
To date that thread has zero replies in 7 months.

The occams-razor explanation would seem to be that cluster admins
simply don't do rolling upgrades between major versions.

Perhaps you can convince lmb to fix it, I think he had thoughts of
using that capability.
But hey, if hoards of people suddenly turn up saying they simply must
have rolling upgrades to 1.0 I will of course work on it myself.