[Pacemaker] Question about behavior when a resource was put into unmanaged mode

Andrew Beekhof andrew at beekhof.net
Thu Aug 1 02:26:04 EDT 2013


On 01/08/2013, at 2:00 AM, David Vossel <dvossel at redhat.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kazunori INOUE" <inouekazu at intellilink.co.jp>
>> To: "pacemaker at oss" <pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 1:20:58 AM
>> Subject: [Pacemaker] Question about behavior when a resource was put into	unmanaged mode
>> Hi,
>> I'm using pacemaker-1.1.10. (4ae1f17)
>> When I put a primitive (p1) of group resource into unmanaged mode, low-order
>> primitive (p2) restarted.
>> In the case of pacemaker-1.0.13, p2 doesn't stop (it continues "Started").
>> Is this the assumed behavior?
> I played around with this and I'm seeing the same thing you are... I would not expect setting a resource as un-managed to restart dependencies like this.  Please file a bug at bugs.clusterlabs.org so we can make sure this gets fixed.
> I also tried setting order and colocation constraints between the two resources in a way that would make them work the same as a group.  Setting the first resource in the chain to unmanaged did not result in a restart of the other resources. This issue looks limited to group usage.
> -- Vossel
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list