No subject

And allocates clone instances for it. I'd want to get rid of that instances.

> Its no different to running just corosync on a node.
Yes, but cman plugins are now mandatory for dlm/gfs.

BTW is supposed that pacemaker should not care about dlm_controld and
friends anymore? Or it will receive enough information from cman about
whole DLM subsystem?

> 
>> So all clone resources are extended with one
>> more instance which "will never be started".  On the other hand I see in
>> pacemaker sources, that there are two types of nodes: member and ping,
>> and all resource processing is done only for nodes which are members.
>> Would it be too hard to add one more node type, f.e. "arbiter" (it
>> participates in cman cluster so it influences quorum/fencing), which is
>> only valid for CMAN clusters and is not supposed to run any resources?
>> Then clones will not try to extend on that arbiter nodes, fewer
>> resources, less computations, cleaner 'crm status' output.
>>
>> Could you please comment on this?
> 
> Before trying thought experiments, its best to get the starting point
> correct :-)

Ahm, what exactly do you mean? :)

> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vladislav
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
>>
>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
>> Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> 
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker