Mailing List Archive: Linux-HA: Dev

Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents)

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

florian.haas at linbit

Jun 3, 2011, 12:13 AM

Post #1 of 35 (1083 views)
Permalink

Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents)

> Hi All,
>
> We found a problem in the resource agent of postfix.

*Please* don't reply to an old thread if you mean to start a new one,
hijacking threads just confuses everyone.

>
> The resource agent of postfix carries out /usr/sbin/postfix in status parameter, but this is not available in old postfix.

I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
patch. Thanks.

Cheers,
Florian

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.26 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 3, 2011, 12:40 AM

Post #2 of 35 (1049 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Florian,

> *Please* don't reply to an old thread if you mean to start a new one,
> hijacking threads just confuses everyone.

All right.
Thanks!

> I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
> merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
> the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
> patch. Thanks.

OK.
Please wait for a while until I make the patch of the resource agent of latest postfix.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Florian Haas <florian.haas [at] linbit> wrote:

> > Hi All,
> >
> > We found a problem in the resource agent of postfix.
>
> *Please* don't reply to an old thread if you mean to start a new one,
> hijacking threads just confuses everyone.
>
> >
> > The resource agent of postfix carries out /usr/sbin/postfix in status parameter, but this is not available in old postfix.
>
> I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
> merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
> the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
> patch. Thanks.
>
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 3, 2011, 2:34 AM

Post #3 of 35 (1049 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi!

On 06/03/2011 09:40 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
>> I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
>> merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
>> the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
>> patch. Thanks.
>
> OK.
> Please wait for a while until I make the patch of the resource agent of latest postfix.

this hasn't been addressed yet. my first goal was to improve the
current postfix ra/current functionality for the postfix versions
i'm curerntly able to test with.

thus, the status section problem hasn't yet been addressed.

patches for [1] are welcome. i'll check them and sign them off.
(please try to use the newest ra only)

please test them using the current ocft [2]

e.g. wget the ocft test to /root/ocft/ and run

/usr/sbin/ocft clean
/usr/sbin/ocft make -d /root/ocft/ postfix
/usr/sbin/ocft test

if some tests fail, you might also try
/usr/sbin/ocft test -v

for verbose output.

thanks,
raoul

[1]
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
[2]
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/tools/ocft/postfix
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

dejan at suse

Jun 3, 2011, 2:45 AM

Post #4 of 35 (1047 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:34:38AM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 06/03/2011 09:40 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> >> I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
> >> merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
> >> the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
> >> patch. Thanks.
> >
> > OK.
> > Please wait for a while until I make the patch of the resource agent of latest postfix.
>
> this hasn't been addressed yet. my first goal was to improve the
> current postfix ra/current functionality for the postfix versions
> i'm curerntly able to test with.

Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
before the release.

Cheers,

Dejan

> thus, the status section problem hasn't yet been addressed.
>
> patches for [1] are welcome. i'll check them and sign them off.
> (please try to use the newest ra only)
>
> please test them using the current ocft [2]
>
> e.g. wget the ocft test to /root/ocft/ and run
>
> /usr/sbin/ocft clean
> /usr/sbin/ocft make -d /root/ocft/ postfix
> /usr/sbin/ocft test
>
> if some tests fail, you might also try
> /usr/sbin/ocft test -v
>
> for verbose output.
>
> thanks,
> raoul
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> [2]
> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/tools/ocft/postfix
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
> Technischer Leiter
>
> IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
> Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
> 1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
> FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
> ____________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 3, 2011, 3:03 AM

Post #5 of 35 (1045 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> before the release.

it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
see commit e7af463d or

https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100

i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 3, 2011, 3:11 AM

Post #6 of 35 (1051 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Dejan,
Hi Raoul,

Thank you for comment.

I investigated some points.
The status command seems to be supported by 2.5.0 version.
The data_directory parameter seems to be supported by 2.5.0 version, too.
Get the version of postfix by "postconf -h mail_version" command.

> Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> before the release.

I think so, too.

There is the place that I want to revise a little elsewhere in the resource agent of postfix.
I make a patch about a correction of status and other corrections.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:34:38AM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On 06/03/2011 09:40 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > >> I believe this has been addressed in the latest patch set that was
> > >> merged a couple of days ago; please try to reproduce the problem with
> > >> the postfix RA from upstream git before you start working on your own
> > >> patch. Thanks.
> > >
> > > OK.
> > > Please wait for a while until I make the patch of the resource agent of latest postfix.
> >
> > this hasn't been addressed yet. my first goal was to improve the
> > current postfix ra/current functionality for the postfix versions
> > i'm curerntly able to test with.
>
> Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> before the release.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dejan
>
> > thus, the status section problem hasn't yet been addressed.
> >
> > patches for [1] are welcome. i'll check them and sign them off.
> > (please try to use the newest ra only)
> >
> > please test them using the current ocft [2]
> >
> > e.g. wget the ocft test to /root/ocft/ and run
> >
> >��/usr/sbin/ocft clean
> >��/usr/sbin/ocft make -d /root/ocft/ postfix
> >��/usr/sbin/ocft test
> >
> > if some tests fail, you might also try
> >��/usr/sbin/ocft test -v
> >
> > for verbose output.
> >
> > thanks,
> > raoul
> >
> > [1]
> > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> > [2]
> > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/master/tools/ocft/postfix
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > Technischer Leiter
> >
> > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

dejan at suse

Jun 3, 2011, 3:54 AM

Post #7 of 35 (1044 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > before the release.
>
> it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> see commit e7af463d or
>
> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
>
> i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379

OK. I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
been introduced in the latest set of patches. This is another
matter then.

Cheers,

Dejan

> thanks,
> raoul
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
> Technischer Leiter
>
> IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
> Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
> 1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
> FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
> ____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 5, 2011, 7:51 PM

Post #8 of 35 (1038 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi All,

I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
It is made the following modifications.

* Carry out status processing in a version judgment
* Change of the parameter check
* Error log when status processing failed
* Value set of the ret variable

I send the patch of other corrections later.

Please comment on all of you for the patch.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > > before the release.
> >
> > it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> > see commit e7af463d or
> >
> > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
> >
> > i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379
>
> OK.� I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
> been introduced in the latest set of patches.� This is another
> matter then.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dejan
>
> > thanks,
> > raoul
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > Technischer Leiter
> >
> > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>

Attachments:

postfix.patch1 (2.85 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 5, 2011, 8:08 PM

Post #9 of 35 (1041 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi All,

The next patch supports a loop of the waiting of the start processing successively.
The start processing revised it like other resource agents to wait on for start.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Mon, 2011/6/6, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> It is made the following modifications.
>
> * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> * Change of the parameter check
> * Error log when status processing failed
> * Value set of the ret variable
>
> I send the patch of other corrections later.
>
> Please comment on all of you for the patch.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
> --- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > > On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > > > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > > > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > > > before the release.
> > >
> > > it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> > > see commit e7af463d or
> > >
> > > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
> > >
> > > i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> > > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379
> >
> > OK.� I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
> > been introduced in the latest set of patches.� This is another
> > matter then.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dejan
> >
> > > thanks,
> > > raoul
> > > --
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > > Technischer Leiter
> > >
> > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> >

Attachments:

postfix.patch2 (0.64 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 5, 2011, 9:36 PM

Post #10 of 35 (1044 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi All,

Sorry....

+ if [ ${ver_str[0]} -le 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -le 5 ]; then

I missed.

+ if [ ${ver_str[0]} -lt 2 -o ${ver_str[0]} -eq 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -lt 5 ]; then

Thanks.
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Mon, 2011/6/6, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> It is made the following modifications.
>
> * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> * Change of the parameter check
> * Error log when status processing failed
> * Value set of the ret variable
>
> I send the patch of other corrections later.
>
> Please comment on all of you for the patch.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
> --- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > > On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > > > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > > > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > > > before the release.
> > >
> > > it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> > > see commit e7af463d or
> > >
> > > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
> > >
> > > i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> > > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379
> >
> > OK.� I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
> > been introduced in the latest set of patches.� This is another
> > matter then.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dejan
> >
> > > thanks,
> > > raoul
> > > --
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > > Technischer Leiter
> > >
> > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> >
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

dejan at suse

Jun 6, 2011, 2:41 AM

Post #11 of 35 (1028 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Hideo-san,

On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 01:36:01PM +0900, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Sorry....
>
> + if [ ${ver_str[0]} -le 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -le 5 ]; then
>
> I missed.
>
> + if [ ${ver_str[0]} -lt 2 -o ${ver_str[0]} -eq 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -lt 5 ]; then

In the latest version of ocf-shellfuncs there is some support for
version checks.

Cheers,

Dejan

> Thanks.
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
> --- On Mon, 2011/6/6, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> > It is made the following modifications.
> >
> > * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> > * Change of the parameter check
> > * Error log when status processing failed
> > * Value set of the ret variable
> >
> > I send the patch of other corrections later.
> >
> > Please comment on all of you for the patch.
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > > > On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > > > > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > > > > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > > > > before the release.
> > > >
> > > > it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> > > > see commit e7af463d or
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
> > > >
> > > > i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> > > > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379
> > >
> > > OK.� I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
> > > been introduced in the latest set of patches.� This is another
> > > matter then.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Dejan
> > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > raoul
> > > > --
> > > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > > > Technischer Leiter
> > > >
> > > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > > > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > > > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > _______________________________________________________
> > > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> > >
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 6, 2011, 3:52 AM

Post #12 of 35 (1030 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

On 06/06/2011 05:08 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> The next patch supports a loop of the waiting of the start processing successively.
> The start processing revised it like other resource agents to wait on for start.

hi!

personally, i would do the "sleep 1" at the beginning as, in my
experience, running monitor immediately after start is prone to failing.

postfix needs some time for startup - at least on my postfix-mysql &
always present outbound mailqueue setup.

if it's ok for you, i'll apply your patch (slightly modified) to my
tree at https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 6, 2011, 6:03 AM

Post #13 of 35 (1023 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Hideo-san!

On 06/06/2011 04:51 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> It is made the following modifications.
>
> * Carry out status processing in a version judgment

i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
version and call "postfix status" only if available.

btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
(douple u/p)

for the version check, i think we should try using the
ocf internal function.

> * Change of the parameter check
the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)

> * Error log when status processing failed
> * Value set of the ret variable

i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.

please comment on my suggestions and/or update the
ra in this regard.

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 6, 2011, 6:27 AM

Post #14 of 35 (1025 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hideo-san, i updated your postfix.patch2 the way i would improve it.
any objections?

cheers,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________

Attachments:

postfix_initial_monitor.patch (0.79 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 6, 2011, 3:10 PM

Post #15 of 35 (1023 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

> Hideo-san, i updated your postfix.patch2 the way i would improve it.
> any objections?

No.
Thanks!

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Mon, 2011/6/6, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> Hideo-san, i updated your postfix.patch2 the way i would improve it.
> any objections?
>
> cheers,
> raoul
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> Technischer Leiter
>
> IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 6, 2011, 3:14 PM

Post #16 of 35 (1020 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Dejan,

Thank you for comment.

> In the latest version of ocf-shellfuncs there is some support for
> version checks.

I did not know that there was the check handling of version in new ocf-shellfuncs.
I renew a patch to use the processing.

Thanks.
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Mon, 2011/6/6, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:

> Hi Hideo-san,
>
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 01:36:01PM +0900, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Sorry....
> >
> > +� � if [ ${ver_str[0]} -le 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -le 5 ]; then
> >
> > I missed.
> >
> > +� � if [ ${ver_str[0]} -lt 2 -o ${ver_str[0]} -eq 2 -a ${ver_str[1]} -lt 5 ]; then
>
> In the latest version of ocf-shellfuncs there is some support for
> version checks.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dejan
>
> > Thanks.
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> >
> >
> > --- On Mon, 2011/6/6, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> > > It is made the following modifications.
> > >
> > >� * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> > >� * Change of the parameter check
> > >� * Error log when status processing failed
> > >� * Value set of the ret variable
> > >
> > > I send the patch of other corrections later.
> > >
> > > Please comment on all of you for the patch.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Hideo Yamauchi.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- On Fri, 2011/6/3, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejan [at] suse> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:03:20PM +0200, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > > > > On 06/03/2011 11:45 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > > > > > Regressions are bad. You have to keep in mind that not everybody
> > > > > > runs the latest release of postfix. This really needs to be fixed
> > > > > > before the release.
> > > > >
> > > > > it's no regression but has been like that since the initial release.
> > > > > see commit e7af463d or
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blame/master/heartbeat/postfix#LID100
> > > > >
> > > > > i didn't know this until Noah brought this to my/our attention:
> > > > > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/72379#72379
> > > >
> > > > OK.� I misunderstood the post, it seemed to me as if status had
> > > > been introduced in the latest set of patches.� This is another
> > > > matter then.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Dejan
> > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > raoul
> > > > > --
> > > > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > > > > Technischer Leiter
> > > > >
> > > > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > > > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > > > > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > > > > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > > > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > _______________________________________________________
> > > > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> > > >
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 6, 2011, 3:24 PM

Post #17 of 35 (1018 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

Thank you for comment.

> i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> version and call "postfix status" only if available.

I think so.

However, I do not know a lot about postfix so.
I want the opinion of the detailed person.

> btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> (douple u/p)

Sorry...
It is my typo.

> for the version check, i think we should try using the
> ocf internal function.

Ok.

>
> > * Change of the parameter check
> the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)

Thanks!

>
> > * Error log when status processing failed
> > * Value set of the ret variable
>
> i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.

I made modifications to set unsettled ret variable in an original resource agent.
But I am unsettled, the ret variable may not have to output it in log.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Mon, 2011/6/6, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> Hi Hideo-san!
>
> On 06/06/2011 04:51 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> > It is made the following modifications.
> >
> >� * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
>
> i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> version and call "postfix status" only if available.
>
> btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> (douple u/p)
>
> for the version check, i think we should try using the
> ocf internal function.
>
> >� * Change of the parameter check
> the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)
>
> >� * Error log when status processing failed
> >� * Value set of the ret variable
>
> i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.
>
> please comment on my suggestions and/or update the
> ra in this regard.
>
> thanks,
> raoul
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> Technischer Leiter
>
> IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 6, 2011, 7:16 PM

Post #18 of 35 (1022 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi All,

I revised the first patch.
Please confirm contents.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Tue, 2011/6/7, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi Raoul,
>
> Thank you for comment.
>
> > i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> > version and call "postfix status" only if available.
>
> I think so.
>
> However, I do not know a lot about postfix so.
> I want the opinion of the detailed person.
>
> > btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> > typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> > (douple u/p)
>
> Sorry...
> It is my typo.
>
> > for the version check, i think we should try using the
> > ocf internal function.
>
> Ok.
>
> >
> > >� * Change of the parameter check
> > the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> > logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)
>
> Thanks!
>
> >
> > >� * Error log when status processing failed
> > >� * Value set of the ret variable
> >
> > i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.
>
> I made modifications to set unsettled ret variable in an original resource agent.
> But I am unsettled, the ret variable may not have to output it in log.
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
> --- On Mon, 2011/6/6, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:
>
> > Hi Hideo-san!
> >
> > On 06/06/2011 04:51 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> > > It is made the following modifications.
> > >
> > >� * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> >
> > i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> > version and call "postfix status" only if available.
> >
> > btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> > typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> > (douple u/p)
> >
> > for the version check, i think we should try using the
> > ocf internal function.
> >
> > >� * Change of the parameter check
> > the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> > logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)
> >
> > >� * Error log when status processing failed
> > >� * Value set of the ret variable
> >
> > i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.
> >
> > please comment on my suggestions and/or update the
> > ra in this regard.
> >
> > thanks,
> > raoul
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > Technischer Leiter
> >
> > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> >
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>

Attachments:

postfix.patch1-new (2.75 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 6, 2011, 7:40 PM

Post #19 of 35 (1021 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

Hi All,

I contribute my last patch.(patch3)
This is a patch for the sources which applied patch 1.
It is the patch which output the details of the error in log.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Tue, 2011/6/7, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I revised the first patch.
> Please confirm contents.
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
> --- On Tue, 2011/6/7, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:
>
> > Hi Raoul,
> >
> > Thank you for comment.
> >
> > > i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> > > version and call "postfix status" only if available.
> >
> > I think so.
> >
> > However, I do not know a lot about postfix so.
> > I want the opinion of the detailed person.
> >
> > > btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> > > typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> > > (douple u/p)
> >
> > Sorry...
> > It is my typo.
> >�
> > > for the version check, i think we should try using the
> > > ocf internal function.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > >
> > > >� * Change of the parameter check
> > > the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> > > logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > >
> > > >� * Error log when status processing failed
> > > >� * Value set of the ret variable
> > >
> > > i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.
> >
> > I made modifications to set unsettled ret variable in an original resource agent.
> > But I am unsettled, the ret variable may not have to output it in log.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> >
> > --- On Mon, 2011/6/6, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Hideo-san!
> > >
> > > On 06/06/2011 04:51 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I send a patch in conjunction with the status processing.
> > > > It is made the following modifications.
> > > >
> > > >� * Carry out status processing in a version judgment
> > >
> > > i think we could safely do the "kill -s 0" for *any*
> > > version and call "postfix status" only if available.
> > >
> > > btw. quickly looking at your patch, i spotted 1
> > > typo: "status_suuport" instead of "status_support"
> > > (douple u/p)
> > >
> > > for the version check, i think we should try using the
> > > ocf internal function.
> > >
> > > >� * Change of the parameter check
> > > the checks are basically fine. i would slightly update the
> > > logging information. (i can do this when i apply your patches)
> > >
> > > >� * Error log when status processing failed
> > > >� * Value set of the ret variable
> > >
> > > i don't think that the use of $ret is correct.
> > >
> > > please comment on my suggestions and/or update the
> > > ra in this regard.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > raoul
> > > --
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > > Technischer Leiter
> > >
> > > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > >
> > _______________________________________________________
> > Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
> >

Attachments:

postfix.patch3 (2.21 KB)

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 8, 2011, 2:09 AM

Post #20 of 35 (1008 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status (was Re: state of heartbeat resource agents) [In reply to]

On 06/07/2011 04:16 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I revised the first patch.
> Please confirm contents.

hi!

thanks. i'm currently checking and applying those patches step-by-step.

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 8, 2011, 10:33 AM

Post #21 of 35 (1008 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

On 07.06.2011 04:40, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I contribute my last patch.(patch3)
> This is a patch for the sources which applied patch 1.
> It is the patch which output the details of the error in log.

hi!

to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.

what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
all output?

(mainly patch3)

thanks,
raoul
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 8, 2011, 2:40 PM

Post #22 of 35 (1005 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

Thank you for the merge of the patch.

> to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
> moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
>
> what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
> all output?

When a problem occurred, the output of detailed log helps an operator.
In addition, pacemaker can give only the log that ra output in std.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Thu, 2011/6/9, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> On 07.06.2011 04:40, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I contribute my last patch.(patch3)
> > This is a patch for the sources which applied patch 1.
> > It is the patch which output the details of the error in log.
>
> hi!
>
> to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
> moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
>
> what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
> all output?
>
> (mainly patch3)
>
> thanks,
> raoul
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 14, 2011, 7:19 PM

Post #23 of 35 (983 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

> > to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
> > moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
> >
> > what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
> > all output?
>
> When a problem occurred, the output of detailed log helps an operator.
> In addition, pacemaker can give only the log that ra output in std.

My the third patch was wrong.
And log of postfix helps a manager enough.

Please abandon my the third patch to a trash box.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Thu, 2011/6/9, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi Raoul,
>
> Thank you for the merge of the patch.
>
> > to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
> > moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
> >
> > what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
> > all output?
>
> When a problem occurred, the output of detailed log helps an operator.
> In addition, pacemaker can give only the log that ra output in std.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 2011/6/9, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:
>
> > On 07.06.2011 04:40, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I contribute my last patch.(patch3)
> > > This is a patch for the sources which applied patch 1.
> > > It is the patch which output the details of the error in log.
> >
> > hi!
> >
> > to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
> > moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
> >
> > what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
> > all output?
> >
> > (mainly patch3)
> >
> > thanks,
> > raoul
> >
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 15, 2011, 12:53 AM

Post #24 of 35 (968 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

On 06/15/2011 04:19 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi Raoul,
>
>>> to my knowledge, the ra's output is logged by pacemaker.
>>> moreover, postfix logs to the mail facility itself.
>>>
>>> what are the reasons for separately capturing and logging
>>> all output?
>>
>> When a problem occurred, the output of detailed log helps an operator.
>> In addition, pacemaker can give only the log that ra output in std.
>
> My the third patch was wrong.
> And log of postfix helps a manager enough.
>
> Please abandon my the third patch to a trash box.

hi Hideo-san!

ok, i'll do that.
did you get a chance to test the latest and greatest postfix ocf ra?

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 15, 2011, 1:19 AM

Post #25 of 35 (969 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

> ok, i'll do that.
> did you get a chance to test the latest and greatest postfix ocf ra?

Thank you for comment.

I do not yet test it in latest postfix.

I intended to test it after it was committed.
If a test is necessary, I participate in a test.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Jun 15, 2011, 3:21 AM

Post #26 of 35 (423 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Hideo-san!

On 06/15/2011 10:53 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> Hi Raoul,
>
> Thank you for comment.
>
>> please test the postfix ra from my repository:
>> https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
>>
>> there is a "minor" issue regarding probes and a resulting double start,
>> which is left to be resolved. no other issues in my production
>> environment so far.
>>
>> so i'd be glad if you could give it a shot!
>
> All right.
>
> I confirm movement in postfix which you showed.

i'm sorry but i do not understand what you mean by that.
can you please rephrase that?

> Because our environment is RHEL, I report a test result on RHEL5 and RHEL6.
perfect!

please refetch one last time from
https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix

i think i got the probing issue fixed!

thanks,
raoul
--
____________________________________________________________________
DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bhatia [at] ipax
Technischer Leiter

IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at
Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. office [at] ipax
1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030
FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 15, 2011, 5:19 AM

Post #27 of 35 (425 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

I'm sorry.
I was weak in English, and it confused you.

> please refetch one last time from
> https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
>
> i think i got the probing issue fixed!

I confirm movement and will inform it of a result tomorrow.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi

--- On Wed, 2011/6/15, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> Hi Hideo-san!
>
> On 06/15/2011 10:53 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > Hi Raoul,
> >
> > Thank you for comment.
> >�
> >> please test the postfix ra from my repository:
> >> https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> >>
> >> there is a "minor" issue regarding probes and a resulting double start,
> >> which is left to be resolved. no other issues in my production
> >> environment so far.
> >>
> >> so i'd be glad if you could give it a shot!
> >
> > All right.
> >
> > I confirm movement in postfix which you showed.
>
> i'm sorry but i do not understand what you mean by that.
> can you please rephrase that?
>
>
> > Because our environment is RHEL, I report a test result on RHEL5 and RHEL6.
> perfect!
>
> please refetch one last time from
> https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
>
> i think i got the probing issue fixed!
>
> thanks,
> raoul
> --
> ____________________________________________________________________
> DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> Technischer Leiter
>
> IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Jun 15, 2011, 8:48 PM

Post #28 of 35 (495 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

I confirmed movement of postfix in the next environment.

* RHEL5 - postfix 2.3.3
* RHEL6 - postfix 2.6.6

The postfix ra worked well.

However, my patch made a mistake.
I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.

Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.

diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
--- a/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
+++ b/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
@@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
postfix_running() {
# run Postfix status if available
if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
- output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
- ret=$?
- if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
- ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
- fi
- return $ret
+ $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
+ return $?
fi

# manually check Postfix's pid

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Wed, 2011/6/15, renayama19661014 [at] ybb <renayama19661014 [at] ybb> wrote:

> Hi Raoul,
>
> I'm sorry.
> I was weak in English, and it confused you.
>
> > please refetch one last time from
> > https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> >
> > i think i got the probing issue fixed!
>
> I confirm movement and will inform it of a result tomorrow.
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi
>
> --- On Wed, 2011/6/15, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:
>
> > Hi Hideo-san!
> >
> > On 06/15/2011 10:53 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > > Hi Raoul,
> > >
> > > Thank you for comment.
> > >�
> > >> please test the postfix ra from my repository:
> > >> https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> > >>
> > >> there is a "minor" issue regarding probes and a resulting double start,
> > >> which is left to be resolved. no other issues in my production
> > >> environment so far.
> > >>
> > >> so i'd be glad if you could give it a shot!
> > >
> > > All right.
> > >
> > > I confirm movement in postfix which you showed.
> >
> > i'm sorry but i do not understand what you mean by that.
> > can you please rephrase that?
> >
> >
> > > Because our environment is RHEL, I report a test result on RHEL5 and RHEL6.
> > perfect!
> >
> > please refetch one last time from
> > https://github.com/raoulbhatia/resource-agents/blob/master/heartbeat/postfix
> >
> > i think i got the probing issue fixed!
> >
> > thanks,
> > raoul
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc.� � � � � email.� � � � � r.bhatia [at] ipax
> > Technischer Leiter
> >
> > IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG� � � � � web.� � � � � http://www.ipax.at
> > Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11� � � � ��email.� � � � � � office [at] ipax
> > 1190 Wien� � � � � � � � � � � � ��tel.� � � � � � ��+43 1 3670030
> > FN 277995t HG Wien� � � � � � � � � fax.� � � � � � +43 1 3670030 15
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> >
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Sep 6, 2011, 8:12 AM

Post #29 of 35 (339 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

On 06/16/2011 05:48 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> The postfix ra worked well.

thanks for testing my ra. i'll check the ra and will then issue a
pull request.

> However, my patch made a mistake.
> I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
> It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.
>
> Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
>
> diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
> --- a/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
> +++ b/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
> @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
> postfix_running() {
> # run Postfix status if available
> if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
> - output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
> - ret=$?
> - if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
> - ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
> - fi
> - return $ret
> + $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
> + return $?
> fi
>
> # manually check Postfix's pid

it's been a while since i looked into the code.

why do you want to issue "postfix status" if /usr/sbin/postfix
does not support this command?

thanks,
raoul
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Sep 6, 2011, 4:50 PM

Post #30 of 35 (346 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

> thanks for testing my ra. i'll check the ra and will then issue a
> pull request.

Okay.
We hope that a correction is included in the next release of the resource agent.

>
> > However, my patch made a mistake.
> > I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
> > It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.
> >
> > Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
> >
> > diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
> > --- a/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
> > +++ b/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
> > @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
> > postfix_running() {
> > # run Postfix status if available
> > if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
> > - output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
> > - ret=$?
> > - if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
> > - ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
> > - fi
> > - return $ret
> > + $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
> > + return $?
> > fi
> >
> > # manually check Postfix's pid
>
> it's been a while since i looked into the code.
>
> why do you want to issue "postfix status" if /usr/sbin/postfix
> does not support this command?

I thought that output could acquire the details of the problem of "postfix status" with a former patch.
And I thought the output of the details of the problem to be useful for an operator.
However, the details of the problem only were really reflected on log of postfix in the environment that I tried.

Therefore I want to withdraw the suggestion of the patch of this part.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Wed, 2011/9/7, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> On 06/16/2011 05:48 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> > The postfix ra worked well.
>
> thanks for testing my ra. i'll check the ra and will then issue a
> pull request.
>
> > However, my patch made a mistake.
> > I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
> > It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.
> >
> > Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
> >
> > diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
> > --- a/postfix��Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
> > +++ b/postfix��Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
> > @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
> >��postfix_running() {
> >� � ��# run Postfix status if available
> >� � ��if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
> > -� � � � output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
> > -� � � � ret=$?
> > -� � � � if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
> > -� � � � � � ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
> > -� � � � fi
> > -� � � � return $ret
> > +� � � � $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
> > +� � � � return $?
> >� � ��fi
> >
> >� � ��# manually check Postfix's pid
>
> it's been a while since i looked into the code.
>
> why do you want to issue "postfix status" if /usr/sbin/postfix
> does not support this command?
>
> thanks,
> raoul
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Sep 7, 2011, 3:37 AM

Post #31 of 35 (350 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

hi Hideo-san!

On 09/07/2011 01:50 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
>>> However, my patch made a mistake.
>>> > > I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
>>> > > It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.
>>> > >
>>> > > Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
>>> > >
>>> > > diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
>>> > > --- a/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
>>> > > +++ b/postfix Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
>>> > > @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
>>> > > postfix_running() {
>>> > > # run Postfix status if available
>>> > > if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
>>> > > - output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
>>> > > - ret=$?
>>> > > - if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
>>> > > - ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
>>> > > - fi
>>> > > - return $ret
>>> > > + $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
>>> > > + return $?
>>> > > fi
>>> > >
>>> > > # manually check Postfix's pid
[...]
> I thought that output could acquire the details of the problem of "postfix status" with a former patch.
> And I thought the output of the details of the problem to be useful for an operator.
> However, the details of the problem only were really reflected on log of postfix in the environment that I tried.
>
> Therefore I want to withdraw the suggestion of the patch of this part.

does it hurt if we leave this patch in? i do not see any problem with
that code.

thanks,
raoul
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

renayama19661014 at ybb

Sep 7, 2011, 7:49 PM

Post #32 of 35 (334 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,

> does it hurt if we leave this patch in? i do not see any problem with
> that code.

Even if you do not apply a patch even if you apply this patch, there is not the big problem.
I am lacking in my explanation, and I'm sorry.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Wed, 2011/9/7, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] <r.bhatia [at] ipax> wrote:

> hi Hideo-san!
>
> On 09/07/2011 01:50 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> >>> However, my patch made a mistake.
> >>> >� >� I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
> >>> >� >� It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem after all.
> >>> >� >
> >>> >� >� Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
> >>> >� >
> >>> >� >� diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
> >>> >� >� --- a/postfix��Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
> >>> >� >� +++ b/postfix��Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
> >>> >� >� @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
> >>> >� >� ��postfix_running() {
> >>> >� >� � � ��# run Postfix status if available
> >>> >� >� � � ��if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
> >>> >� >� -� � � � output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
> >>> >� >� -� � � � ret=$?
> >>> >� >� -� � � � if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
> >>> >� >� -� � � � � � ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
> >>> >� >� -� � � � fi
> >>> >� >� -� � � � return $ret
> >>> >� >� +� � � � $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
> >>> >� >� +� � � � return $?
> >>> >� >� � � ��fi
> >>> >� >
> >>> >� >� � � ��# manually check Postfix's pid
> [...]
> > I thought that output could acquire the details of the problem of "postfix status" with a former patch.
> > And I thought the output of the details of the problem to be useful for an operator.
> > However, the details of the problem only were really reflected on log of postfix in the environment that I tried.
> >
> > Therefore I want to withdraw the suggestion of the patch of this part.
>
> does it hurt if we leave this patch in? i do not see any problem with
> that code.
>
> thanks,
> raoul
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

r.bhatia at ipax

Sep 8, 2011, 1:34 AM

Post #33 of 35 (331 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

On 09/08/2011 04:49 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> do not apply a patch even if you apply this patch, there is not the big problem.
> I am lacking in my explanation, and I'm sorry.

ok. i just updated my pull request.

https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/pull/20

dejan, can you please review and apply our patches?

thanks,
raoul
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

f.g.haas at gmx

Sep 8, 2011, 2:13 AM

Post #34 of 35 (329 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

On 09/08/11 10:34, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> On 09/08/2011 04:49 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
>> do not apply a patch even if you apply this patch, there is not the big problem.
>> I am lacking in my explanation, and I'm sorry.
>
> ok. i just updated my pull request.
>
> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/pull/20
>
> dejan, can you please review and apply our patches?

Taking the liberty to step in for Dejan, I've merged and pushed your
changes. Thanks for your contribution!

Cheers,
Florian

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.26 KB)

renayama19661014 at ybb

Sep 8, 2011, 5:38 PM

Post #35 of 35 (330 views)
Permalink

Re: Postfix status [In reply to]

Hi Raoul,
Hi Florian,

Thank you for the change of the repository.

Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.

--- On Thu, 2011/9/8, Florian Haas <f.g.haas [at] gmx> wrote:

> On 09/08/11 10:34, Raoul Bhatia [IPAX] wrote:
> > On 09/08/2011 04:49 AM, renayama19661014 [at] ybb wrote:
> >>��do not apply a patch even if you apply this patch, there is not the big problem.
> >> I am lacking in my explanation, and I'm sorry.
> >
> > ok. i just updated my pull request.
> >
> > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/pull/20
> >
> > dejan, can you please review and apply our patches?
>
> Taking the liberty to step in for Dejan, I've merged and pushed your
> changes. Thanks for your contribution!
>
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads