[Pacemaker] RFC: What part of the XML configuration do you hate the most?

Andrew Beekhof beekhof at gmail.com
Thu Nov 6 04:40:39 EST 2008

On Nov 6, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Satomi TANIGUCHI wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:59, Andrew Beekhof <beekhof at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>> as soon as the resource is stopped, the failed action is ignored and
>> therefore the node is no longer in standby mode.
>> i think we need a general approach to this issue - since we probably
>> want other on-fail actions to also apply in the same scenario.
> Sorry, I'm confused.
> You mean that failure action isn't executed in some case?

No, I don't mean that.

Take on-fail=stop for example...
If we detect the resource failed, we stop it. (so far so good).
However now that its stopped, the failed operation is no longer  
considered and we "forget" that the resource is supposed to _stay_  

The solution is to check the "old" operations for this sort of  

> And it's not only about on_fail="standby"?
> If so, please let me know what kind of case the problem occurs.

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list