[Pacemaker] Behavior booth when the temporary ACT site down happened.

[Jiaju Zhang]

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 17:46 +0900, Yuichi SEINO wrote:
> Hi Jiaju,
> 
> 2012/7/11 Jiaju Zhang <jjzhang at suse.de>:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 11:47 +0900, Yuichi SEINO wrote:
> >> Hi Jiaju,
> >>
> >> My environment consist of Site A, Site B, and Site C(Arbitrator). And
> >> I granted a ticket to Site A. And then I execute Site A down.
> >> Secondly, I start up Site A within the expire date.  then the state of
> >> Site A is that the ticket is revoked. So Site B is granted after the
> >> ticket expired.
> >>
> >> I would like to know if this behavior is correct.
> >>
> >> As I see it, If Site A succeed in catchup, Site A should keep a ticket
> >> after the ticket expired.
> >>
> >
> > Oh, this should not be a bug, but in the future we may add some
> > configuration options or some policy to let it work as what the user
> > expected. There is a small window from the original ticket owner decided
> > to renew to the ticket expires. Although you get the Site A started
> > within the expire date, but it approaches the expire very soon, so no
> > enough time to renew that ticket.
> >
> > Currently that small window is 20% of the expire time, but it should be
> > able to be configured by the users. So, in the future development, I'm
> > planning to make it configurable and also add more policy on the renew
> > logic.
> >
> 
> For example,  if the expire date is 10 min,  Site A can keep a ticket
> when Site A is repaired until 8 min.
> Am I correct in thinking this?

Yes.

> 
> However,  I found an another problem　when I am looking the log.  Site
> A never store a ticket information in cib after Site A is restart.
> Tentatively, this log put in bugzilla.
> 
> http://bugs.clusterlabs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5082

OK, I'll look into this as well;)

Thanks,
Jiaju