[ClusterLabs Developers] Impact of changing Pacemaker daemon names on other projects?

Ken Gaillot kgaillot at redhat.com
Thu Mar 29 12:13:08 EDT 2018

Hi all,

As I'm sure you've seen, there is a strong sentiment on the users list
to change all the Pacemaker daemon names in Pacemaker 2.0.0, mainly to
make it easier to read the logs.

This will obviously affect any other scripts and projects that look for
the old names. I'd like to hear more developer input on how far we
should go with this, and how much or little of a headache it will
cause. I'm interested in both the public projects that use pacemaker
(crmsh, pcs, sbd, dlm, openstack) and one-off scripts that people
commonly put together.

In order of minimum impact to maximum impact, we could actually do this
in stages:

1. Log tags: This hopefully wouldn't affect anyone. For example, from

Mar 12 12:10:49 [11120] node1 pacemakerd:     info:
crm_log_init:     Changed active directory to /var/lib/pacemaker/cores


Mar 12 12:10:49 [11120] node1 pcmk-launchd:     info:
crm_log_init:     Changed active directory to /var/lib/pacemaker/cores

2. Process names: what shows up in "ps". I'm hoping this would affect
very little outside code, so we can at least get this far.

3. Library names: for example, -lstonithd to -lpcmk-fencing. Other
projects would need their configure script to auto-detect which is
available. Not difficult, but it makes all older versions of other
projects incompatible with Pacemaker 2.0. This is mostly what I want
feedback on, whether this is a good idea. The only advantage is
consistency and clarity.

4. Public API symbols: for example, crm_meta_name() ->
pcmk_meta_name(). This would be a huge project with huge impact, and
will definitely not be done for 2.0.0. We would immediately start using
the new convention for new API symbols, and more slowly update existing
ones (with compatibility wrappers for the old names).
Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com>

More information about the Developers mailing list