<div style="line-height:1.7;color:#000000;font-size:14px;font-family:Arial"><br><pre>>Also, I forgot about the undocumented/unsupported start-delay operation
>attribute, that you can put on the status operation to delay the first
>monitor. That may give you the behavior you want.</pre><div>I have try to add "start-delay=60s" to monitor operation. The first monitor was really delayed as 60s. But in the 60s, it will block other resources too! The result is the same to sleeping in monitor.<br>So, I think the best method for me, is to judge whether need to return success in monitor function by timestamp.<br>Thank you very much!<br></div><br><br><br><div style="position:relative;zoom:1"></div><div id="divNeteaseMailCard"></div><br><pre><br>At 2017-11-06 21:53:53, "Ken Gaillot" <kgaillot@redhat.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 22:46 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Another possibility would be to have the start return immediately,
>> and
>> >make the monitor artificially return success for the first 10
>> minutes
>> >after starting. It's hacky, and it depends on your situation whether
>> >the behavior is acceptable.
>> I tried to put the sleep into the monitor function,( I add a “sleep
>> 60” at the monitor entry for debug), the start function returns
>> immediately. I found an interesting thing that is, at the first time
>> of monitor after start, it will block other resource too, but from
>> the second time, it won't block other resources! Is this normal?
>
>Yes, the first result is for an unknown status, but after that, the
>cluster assumes the resource is OK unless/until the monitor says
>otherwise.
>
>However, I wasn't suggesting putting a sleep inside the monitor -- I
>was just thinking of having the monitor check the time, and if it's
>within 10 minutes of start, return success.
>
>> >My first thought on how to implement this
>> >would be to have the start action set a private node attribute
>> >(attrd_updater -p) with a timestamp. When the monitor runs, it could
>> do
>> >its usual check, and if it succeeds, remove that node attribute, but
>> if
>> >it fails, check the node attribute to see whether it's within the
>> >desired delay.
>> This means that if it is in the desired delay， monitor should return
>> success even if healthcheck failed？
>> I think this can solve my problem except "crm status" show
>
>Yes, that's what I had in mind. The status would show "running", which
>may or may not be what you want in this case.
>
>Also, I forgot about the undocumented/unsupported start-delay operation
>attribute, that you can put on the status operation to delay the first
>monitor. That may give you the behavior you want.
>
>> At 2017-11-01 21:20:50, "Ken Gaillot" <kgaillot@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >On Sat, 2017-10-28 at 01:11 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thank you for your response! This means that there shoudn't be
>> long
>> >> "sleep" in ocf script.
>> >> If my service takes 10 minite from service starting to healthcheck
>> >> normally, then what shoud I do?
>> >
>> >That is a tough situation with no great answer.
>> >
>> >You can leave it as it is, and live with the delay. Note that it
>> only
>> >happens if a resource fails after the slow resource has already
>> begun
>> >starting ... if they fail at the same time (as with a node failure),
>> >the cluster will schedule recovery for both at the same time.
>> >
>> >Another possibility would be to have the start return immediately,
>> and
>> >make the monitor artificially return success for the first 10
>> minutes
>> >after starting. It's hacky, and it depends on your situation whether
>> >the behavior is acceptable. My first thought on how to implement
>> this
>> >would be to have the start action set a private node attribute
>> >(attrd_updater -p) with a timestamp. When the monitor runs, it could
>> do
>> >its usual check, and if it succeeds, remove that node attribute, but
>> if
>> >it fails, check the node attribute to see whether it's within the
>> >desired delay.
>> >
>> >> Thank you very much!
>> >>
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> > If I remember correctly, any pending actions from a previous
>> >> transition
>> >> > must be completed before a new transition can be calculated.
>> >> Otherwise,
>> >> > there's the possibility that the pending action could change the
>> >> state
>> >> > in a way that makes the second transition's decisions harmful.
>> >> > Theoretically (and ideally), pacemaker could figure out whether
>> >> some of
>> >> > the actions in the second transition would be needed regardless
>> of
>> >> > whether the pending actions succeeded or failed, but in
>> practice,
>> >> that
>> >> > would be difficult to implement (and possibly take more time to
>> >> > calculate than is desirable in a recovery situation).
>> >>
>> >> > On Fri, 2017-10-27 at 23:54 +0800, lkxjtu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I have two clone resources in my corosync/pacemaker cluster.
>> They
>> >> are
>> >> > fm_mgt and logserver. Both of their RA is ocf. fm_mgt takes 1
>> >> minute
>> >> > to start the
>> >> > service(calling ocf start function for 1 minite). Configured as
>> >> > below：
>> >> > # crm configure show
>> >> > node 168002177: 192.168.2.177
>> >> > node 168002178: 192.168.2.178
>> >> > node 168002179: 192.168.2.179
>> >> > primitive fm_mgt fm_mgt \
>> >> > op monitor interval=20s timeout=120s \
>> >> > op stop interval=0 timeout=120s on-fail=restart \
>> >> > op start interval=0 timeout=120s on-fail=restart \
>> >> > meta target-role=Started
>> >> > primitive logserver logserver \
>> >> > op monitor interval=20s timeout=120s \
>> >> > op stop interval=0 timeout=120s on-fail=restart \
>> >> > op start interval=0 timeout=120s on-fail=restart \
>> >> > meta target-role=Started
>> >> > clone fm_mgt_replica fm_mgt
>> >> > clone logserver_replica logserver
>> >> > property cib-bootstrap-options: \
>> >> > have-watchdog=false \
>> >> > dc-version=1.1.13-10.el7-44eb2dd \
>> >> > cluster-infrastructure=corosync \
>> >> > stonith-enabled=false \
>> >> > start-failure-is-fatal=false
>> >> > When I kill fm_mgt service on one node，pacemaker will
>> immediately
>> >> > recover it after monitor failed. This looks perfectly normal.
>> But
>> >> in
>> >> > this 1 minite
>> >> > of fm_mgt starting, if I kill logserver service on any node, the
>> >> > monitor will catch the fail normally too，but pacemaker will not
>> >> > restart it
>> >> > immediately but waiting for fm_mgt starting finished. After
>> fm_mgt
>> >> > starting finished, pacemaker begin restarting logserver. It
>> seems
>> >> > that there are
>> >> > some dependency between pacemaker resource.
>> >> > # crm status
>> >> > Last updated: Thu Oct 26 06:40:24 2017 Last change: Thu
>> >> Oct
>> >> > 26 06:36:33 2017 by root via crm_resource on 192.168.2.177
>> >> > Stack: corosync
>> >> > Current DC: 192.168.2.179 (version 1.1.13-10.el7-44eb2dd) -
>> >> partition
>> >> > with quorum
>> >> > 3 nodes and 6 resources configured
>> >> > Online: [ 192.168.2.177 192.168.2.178 192.168.2.179 ]
>> >> > Full list of resources:
>> >> > Clone Set: logserver_replica [logserver]
>> >> > logserver (ocf::heartbeat:logserver): FAILED
>> >> 192.168.2.177
>> >> > Started: [ 192.168.2.178 192.168.2.179 ]
>> >> > Clone Set: fm_mgt_replica [fm_mgt]
>> >> > Started: [ 192.168.2.178 192.168.2.179 ]
>> >> > Stopped: [ 192.168.2.177 ]
>> >> > I am confusing very much. Is there something wrong
>> configure?Thank
>> >> > you very much!
>> >> > James
>> >> > best regards
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 【网易自营】好吃到爆！鲜香弹滑加热即食，经典13香/麻辣小龙虾仅75元3斤>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 【网易自营】好吃到爆！鲜香弹滑加热即食，经典13香/麻辣小龙虾仅75元3斤>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 【网易自营|30天无忧退货】仅售同款价1/4！MUJI制造商“2017秋冬舒适家居拖鞋系列”限时仅34.9元>>
>> >--
>> >Ken Gaillot <kgaillot@redhat.com>
>>
>>
>>
>--
>Ken Gaillot <kgaillot@redhat.com>
</pre></div><br><br><span title="neteasefooter"><p> </p></span>