[Pacemaker] Missing lrm_opstatus

[Andrew Beekhof]

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejanmm at fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 09:49:05AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejanmm at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:18:37AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> >> Dejan: looks like something in the lrm library.
>> >> Any idea why the message doesn't contain lrm_opstatus?
>> >
>> > Becase this monitor operation never run. Which seems to be a
>> > plausible explanation since the start-delay is set to 600s.
>>
>> Isn't that what LRM_OP_PENDING is for?
>> I'm happy to see that at least msg_to_op() maps missing fields to that value :-)
>
> Actually it does, it's just that the library code logs the
> warning and then the whole message. The missing op_status is then
> set to LRM_OP_PENDING.

Yep, like I said, I was happy to see that this was the case (I looked
up the code).
Might just be simpler to set it on the server side though and avoid the warning.

>
> BTW, using start-delay means that there's a deficiency in the RA.
> That attribute should be banned.
>

Right, I also meant to mention that in my reply.
I'm still yet to see a valid use for start-delay, Ron: why is it being
used here?