[Pacemaker] Fixed! - Re: Problem with dual-PDU fencing node with redundant PSUs

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2013-06-28T11:29:35, Digimer <lists at alteeve.ca> wrote:

> In rhcs, you can control the fence device's action using 'action="..."'
> attribute in the <device ...> element. So for us rhcs migrants, we
> expect that action="..." in the fence primitive will have the same
> effect. As of now, as you know, this is ignored in favour of the global
> action.

Ah, OK, you were talking about honoring action="" on the primitive. yes,
that makes more sense. I was thinking something different.


> >> I've debated writing a "fence_apc_multi" that takes "reboot" and two or
> >> more PDU addresses/ports and does the break out for you.
> > That is so ugly, please, no :-(
> It's also "ugly" to have four fence primitives per node's PDU. At least
> this way I can abstract the ugliness away from the users and make the
> pcmk config more readable.

Yes, that is horribly ugly. And why it needs to be fixed in the fence
code proper.

> In fact, I've been thinking of a general purpose wrapper that takes the
> desired fence agent as an attribute. I can call it simply 'fence_multi'.

Please. No. :-( That'll still be horrible to configure. Just think about
how user interfaces would have to handle this!

If you're going to fix it, please, I beg you, fix it properly in the
stonith / fence topology code.

Of course, who writes the code wins, but this is headed down such a
bandaid path ...


Regards,
    Lars

-- 
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde