[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: fencing on iscsi device not working

[Andrei Borzenkov]

06.11.2019 18:55, Ken Gaillot пишет:
> On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 08:04 +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>>>>> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> schrieb am 05.11.2019 um
>>>>> 16:05 in
>>
>> Nachricht
>> <d2e2114a48ef66535e11fe2fe5970d2bd687c83d.camel at redhat.com>:
>>> Coincidentally, the documentation for the pcmk_host_check default
>>> was
>>> recently updated for the upcoming 2.0.3 release. Once the release
>>> is
>>> out, the online documentation will be regenerated, but here is the
>>> text:
>>>
>>> Default
>>> ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
>>> static‑list if either pcmk_host_list or pcmk_host_map is set,
>>> otherwise
>>> dynamic‑list if the fence device supports the list action,
>>> otherwise
>>> status if the fence device supports the status action, otherwise
>>> none
>>
>> I'd make that an itemized list with four items. I thinks it would be
>> easer to
>> understand.
> 
> Good idea; I edited it so that the default and description are
> combined:
> 
> How to determine which machines are controlled by the device. Allowed
> values:
> 
> * +static-list:+ check the +pcmk_host_list+ or +pcmk_host_map+
> attribute (this is the default if either one of those is set)
> 
> * +dynamic-list:+ query the device via the "list" command (this is
> otherwise the default if the fence device supports the list action)
> 

Oops, now it became even more ambiguous. What if both pcmk_host_list is
set *and* device supports "list" (or "status") command? Previous variant
at least was explicit about precedence.

"Otherwise" above is hard to attribute correctly. I really like previous
version more.

> * +status:+ query the device via the "status" command (this is
> otherwise the default if the fence device supports the status action)
> 
> * +none:+ assume every device can fence every machine (this is
> otherwise the default)
>