Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Philipp Reisner wrote: >> Will it be possible (in a future release?) to omit the device clause in >> the resource definition >> if the application will only use the symlinks and doesn't care for the >> actual minor device used? >> So that the using systems doesn't need to check for unallocated device >> numbers during new resource creation / resource move to another cluster >> system. >> >> Actually we discussed that here at LINBIT already, we might do that >> some when. BTW, you will likely end up with different minors on the >> two ends of the resource. -> That will break NFS fail over, as long >> as you do not set the fsid of NFS. >> >> Thanks for the explanation - I understand - so as with other parameters some usage scenarios will always set them explicitly and others might be able to get along without them in the future.. >>> *) include statement: >>> Although we have not yet changed the configuration examples, but now >>> it is possible to have a drbd.conf that looks like this: >>> > Oops. > http://git.drbd.org/?p=drbd-8.3.git;a=commitdiff;h=997387d334d2554f57f7c8d6599b4b571e318927;hp=f4b052773f1020d8a0d29009e2b9d8772a737493 > > Thanks for pointing it out! > Thanks again for the very fast response ! WR, Bruno -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20090318/d2f9b4e4/attachment.htm>