[Pacemaker] Call cib_query failed (-41): Remote node did not respond

[Brian J. Murrell]

On 12-07-04 02:12 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Brian J. Murrell <brian-SquOHqY54CVWr29BmMi2cA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>> Just because I reduced the number of nodes doesn't mean that I reduced
>> the parallelism any.
> 
> Yes. You did.  You reduced the number of "check what state the
> resource is on every node" probes.

Let me apologize as I was not clear.  I meant I did not reduce the
amount of parallelism in *my* CIB modify operations.  I was simply
clarifying that my operations on a single node are not serialized and
thus reducing the total number of nodes and increasing the number of
operations per node was not reducing the contention of those operations
by putting more operations into a serial queue per node.

> Now I'm getting annoyed.
> I keep explaining this is not true yet you keep repeating the above assertion.

Yes, I understand what you are saying.  The ordering of the messages on
the list is unfortunate and some seem to have been crossing each other.
 The message you were replying to, which is annoying you was composed
before your subsequent messages and was in response to somebody else on
the list.

My apologies for the confusion.

b.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20120704/80201158/attachment-0003.sig>