[ClusterLabs Developers] OCF_ERR_ARGS vs OCF_ERR_INSTALLED

[Ken Gaillot]

On 11/09/2016 09:57 AM, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It seems OCF_ERR_ARGS has different meanings according to documentations:
> 
>   http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Pacemaker_Explained/s-ocf-return-codes.html
>   «The resource’s configuration is not valid on this machine. E.g. it refers to
>   a location not found on the node. »
> 
>   http://www.linux-ha.org/doc/dev-guides/_literal_ocf_err_args_literal_2.html
>   «The resource agent was invoked with incorrect arguments. This is a safety
>   net "can’t happen" error which the resource agent should only return when
>   invoked with, for example, an incorrect number of command line arguments.»
> 
> When I want to test on the local node if the resource is in the good path,
> using the correct version, with needed setup etc, correctly, I'm not sure if I
> should return either OCF_ERR_ARGS or OCF_ERR_INSTALLED because of this subtle
> different definitions...
> 
> I suppose "Pacemaker Explained" is a bit fresher source of documentation?

Unfortunately, this is some of the divergence from the original OCF
standard that's accrued over the years. Also, Pacemaker uses
OCF_ERR_CONFIGURED for what linux-ha.org is describing here.

Clarifying the exit code meanings is one of the goals of the next
revision of the OCF standard -- a slow process mainly due to time
constraints. So far, we've gotten a reasonable level of community
consensus that ClusterLabs should be the home of the standard, and we
can use the mailing lists and github pull requests to discuss and make
revisions to the standard. I'd like to update the ClusterLabs and OCF
websites before going very far down that road, but my time for that is
limited.

Until then, my recommendation would be that if you intend your agent
primarily for use with pacemaker, follow pacemaker's documentation.