proposed changes to lvsd, nanny, pulse: seeking advice

[Fred Clift]

Hi.  My company is using lvs and we've noticed a few issues.  We have at
least one local patch, and plan on making several more.

 

I cribbed and slightly modified an internal wiki page about our proposed
changes and bugs.

 

In particular there is at least one verified bug in lvsd (mis-indexed
re-read of config file), some missing features (as the documentation
implies, or is missing - pulse re-reading the config file, doesn't pay
attention to the status of it's child lvsd),  nanny doesn't check it's
arguments carefully and may unexpectedly exit etc.

 

 

For a full detailed description of all the issues we've found, and for
our proposed solutions, please see:

 

http://clift.org/fred/lvs/lvs.html

 

 

I have a couple of questions.  First, can you direct me to the process
for submitting patches for lvs/pulse/nanny, and second, are there other
known issues with these programs that we might likely trip over?  In
particular are there nanny options that currently are arguably non-valid
parameters (cause immediate nanny exit) - for example, a timeout of 0 is
one.  Are there others?

 

 

Anyway, I'd appreciate anyone's feedback on our proposed changes and the
patch submission process.

 

Thanks.

 

Fred Clift

fclift at verio.net

Verio Inc.



This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Verio, Inc. makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free.  Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/piranha-list/attachments/20100720/d7adf73e/attachment.htm>