[Pacemaker] Pacemaker 1.1.10 and pacemaker-remote

[Vladislav Bogdanov]

06.12.2013 11:41, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-12-06T08:55:47, Vladislav Bogdanov <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
> 
>> BTW, pacemaker cib accepts any meta attributes (and that is very
>> convenient way for me to store some 'meta' information), while crmsh
>> limits them to a pre-defined list. While that is probably fine for
>> novices, that limits some advanced usage scenarios, that's why I
>> disabled that check by a patch for my builds.
> 
> That's intentional. You're "polluting" a namespace that doesn't belong to
> you. Any update that introduces a new feature could potentially collide
> with your key/value pairs. 

Agree.

> Also, the CIB really isn't performant enough
> to store meta data like this.

Generally I agree. In my use-case I store bits of information needed to
recreate higher-layer configuration in the case of catastrophe (and to
verify that CIB configuration is "correct" after cluster restart). I
read them in the same function with other attributes, after the whole
CIB is received. So performance impact is nearly zero for me.

> 
> If by "advanced" you mean "abusing cluster features", yes, then I agree,
> that are scenarios we want to limit ;-)

Yep, "abuse" is a correct word :)
Fortunately I know how to use text editor, hg diff, patch and rpmbuild ;)