[Pacemaker] questions about the booth

Jiaju Zhang jjzhang at suse.de
Mon Mar 5 00:00:33 EST 2012

Hi Yuusuke,

On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 11:49 +0900, Yuusuke Iida wrote:
> Hi, Jiaju
> I thought about a plan to deal when a resource did not change in sites.
> I think that I make daemon working outside booth.
> This daemon watches it whether a resource can work in sites.
> And it executes revoke command for booth when the state that a resource
> cannot manage was confirmed.
> booth catches revoke and thinks that I move a ticket to another site.

If I understand it correctly, the daemon you mentioned automated some of
the admin's behaviors, if the resources cannot be managed by one site,
revoke the ticket and move the ticket to another site. I have no
objection if the admin has this requirement;) 
The only thing I'm not sure is if the admin really want to do this? My
assumption is if the local site is alive the admin will be inclined to
keep the ticket stay in this site, if the site is totally down, we have
no choice, the ticket has to move to another site to keep the service
However, that is just one using scenario in my mind, booth should
support the using scenario that you mentioned;)

> I think that the continuity of the resource is kept in this movement.
> I analyze CIB and intend to perform the state confirmation of the
> resource using score.

I'm not quite understand here, do you mean that if the resource usually
being un-managed by this site, we'd better move it to another site, so
your daemon will depends on this value to decide whether it would move
the ticket another site, right?

Well, I think you raised another using scenario which I has not thought
of before;) And I agree with you to setup such a daemon to do this work
if the admin need.


More information about the Pacemaker mailing list