[Pacemaker] A resource starts with a standby node.(Latest attrd does not serve as the crmd-transition-delay parameter)

[Andrew Beekhof]

On 14 Jan 2014, at 4:33 pm, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
>>>> Are you using the new attrd code or the legacy stuff?
>>> 
>>> I use new attrd.
>> 
>> And the values are not being sent to the cib at the same time? 
> 
> As far as I looked. . .
> When the transmission of the attribute of attrd of the node was late, a leader of attrd seemed to send an attribute to cib without waiting for it.

And you have a delay configured?  And this value was set prior to that delay expiring?

> 
>>>> Only the new code makes (or at least should do) crmd-transition-delay redundant.
>>> 
>>> It did not seem to work so that new attrd dispensed with crmd-transition-delay to me.
>>> I report the details again.
>>> # Probably it will be Bugzilla. . .
>> 
>> Sounds good
> 
> All right!
> 
> Many Thanks!
> Hideo Yamauch.
> 
> --- On Tue, 2014/1/14, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 14 Jan 2014, at 4:13 pm, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>> 
>>> Thank you for comments.
>>> 
>>>> Are you using the new attrd code or the legacy stuff?
>>> 
>>> I use new attrd.
>> 
>> And the values are not being sent to the cib at the same time? 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If you're not using corosync 2.x or see:
>>>> 
>>>>      crm_notice("Starting mainloop...");
>>>> 
>>>> then its the old code.  The new code could also be used with CMAN but isn't configured to build for in that situation.
>>>> 
>>>> Only the new code makes (or at least should do) crmd-transition-delay redundant.
>>> 
>>> It did not seem to work so that new attrd dispensed with crmd-transition-delay to me.
>>> I report the details again.
>>> # Probably it will be Bugzilla. . .
>> 
>> Sounds good
>> 
>>> 
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>> 
>>> --- On Tue, 2014/1/14, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 14 Jan 2014, at 3:52 pm, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I contributed next bugzilla by a problem to occur for the difference of the timing of the attribute update by attrd before.
>>>>> * https://developerbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2528
>>>>> 
>>>>> We can evade this problem now by using crmd-transition-delay parameter.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I confirmed whether I could evade this problem by renewed attrd recently.
>>>>> * In latest attrd, one became a leader and seemed to come to update an attribute.
>>>>> 
>>>>> However, latest attrd does not seem to substitute for crmd-transition-delay.
>>>>> * I contribute detailed log later.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are dissatisfied with continuing using crmd-transition-delay.
>>>>> Is there the plan when attrd handles this problem well in the future?
>>>> 
>>>> Are you using the new attrd code or the legacy stuff?
>>>> 
>>>> If you're not using corosync 2.x or see:
>>>> 
>>>>      crm_notice("Starting mainloop...");
>>>> 
>>>> then its the old code.  The new code could also be used with CMAN but isn't configured to build for in that situation.
>>>> 
>>>> Only the new code makes (or at least should do) crmd-transition-delay redundant.
>>>> 
>> 
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20140114/66b2bc07/attachment-0004.sig>