[libvirt] Fwd: a question about sanlock
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your quick reply, from safety point of view, yes,
libvirt should exit, but, your alternative solution is more
friendly for users, however, I haven't any idea about this now,
maybe, others want to do this, so forward it to libvirt-list.
Thanks & Regards,
Alex
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange(a)redhat.com>
To: "Alex Jia" <ajia(a)redhat.com>
Cc: libvirt-users(a)redhat.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 4:19:28 PM
Subject: Re: [libvirt] a question about sanlock
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 02:04:09AM -0500, Alex Jia wrote:
Hi Daniel,
I got a question about lock manager, if I enable 'sanlock' in qemu.conf and
uncomment 'auto_disk_leases = 1' in qemu-sanlock.conf then restart libvirtd
service, libvirtd will be dead, I know I should also uncomment 'host_id = 1'
in qemu-sanlock.conf, because I enable 'auto_disk_leases'. The question is
the libvirtd must die due to a error users configuration? or could we give
some warning information instead of libvirtd die?
I think this is a safety issue - if someone is deploying libvirt in an
scenario where they want locking, then we must be very careful not to
accidentally run without locking. So if someone accidentally mis-configures
one of their libvirtd instances to not have any host_id parameter, I felt
the only safe thing todo was to exit. An alternative would be to allow
libvirtd to start, but then make sure it refuses to start any guests.
I'm happy to take patches for the latter if someone wants to...
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|