Bug 1328448

Summary: RFE: start-failure-is-fatal as per-resource parameter instead of global property
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Reporter: Josef Zimek <pzimek>
Component: pacemakerAssignee: Ken Gaillot <kgaillot>
Status: CLOSED MIGRATED QA Contact: cluster-qe <cluster-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact: Steven J. Levine <slevine>
Priority: medium    
Version: 8.0CC: aglotov, cfeist, cluster-maint, fadamo, kgaillot, mnovacek, sbradley, slevine
Target Milestone: pre-dev-freezeKeywords: FutureFeature, MigratedToJIRA, Triaged
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1747563 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-09-22 18:19:41 UTC Type: Story
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1679810, 1747563    

Description Josef Zimek 2016-04-19 12:04:49 UTC
Description of problem:


Currently the "start-failure-is-fatal" is cluster global property so it immediately affects all resources. Some customers would like to have possibility to set this property in per-resource fashion to achieve better granularity of resource behaviour.

Expected result:

Some resources could have the "start-failure-is-fatal" parameter enabled while others disabled.

Comment 2 Andrew Beekhof 2016-04-20 00:06:51 UTC
Seems reasonable, it might talk some time to bubble up the priority list though

Comment 3 Ken Gaillot 2016-05-16 16:48:09 UTC
This will be evaluated in the 7.4 timeframe.

Comment 6 Ken Gaillot 2017-03-15 17:09:37 UTC
This feature will be included with the failure handling overhaul for Bug 1371576.

While a serious effort was made at implementing this, and a substantial amount of prerequisite work has been integrated upstream, the user-visible portion will not be ready in the 7.4 timeframe, so I am pushing this back to 7.5.

Comment 8 Ken Gaillot 2017-10-09 17:11:17 UTC
Due to time constraints, this will not make 7.5

Comment 9 Ken Gaillot 2018-11-19 19:18:24 UTC
Because this will require new configuration syntax, for technical reasons this will only be addressed in RHEL 8

Comment 11 Ken Gaillot 2019-08-30 20:11:32 UTC
The current plan is to implement 2 new operation meta-attributes, failure-restart and failure-escalation, to replace start-failure-is-fatal, migration-threshold, and on-fail (which would still be supported for backward compatibility).

The first failure-restart=<N> failures would result in restart attempts, and if all failed, the response in failure-escalation would be taken (equivalent to the current on-fail values, except "restart", and adding "ban" to force the resource off its current node).

Thus a start action with failure-restart set to 0 would be equivalent to start-failure-is-fatal="true", and a start with action with failure-restart set to a positive number would be equivalent to start-failure-is-fatal="false" with migration_threshold set to that number.

Comment 27 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-22 18:17:17 UTC
Issue migration from Bugzilla to Jira is in process at this time. This will be the last message in Jira copied from the Bugzilla bug.

Comment 28 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-22 18:19:41 UTC
This BZ has been automatically migrated to the issues.redhat.com Red Hat Issue Tracker. All future work related to this report will be managed there.

Due to differences in account names between systems, some fields were not replicated.  Be sure to add yourself to Jira issue's "Watchers" field to continue receiving updates and add others to the "Need Info From" field to continue requesting information.

To find the migrated issue, look in the "Links" section for a direct link to the new issue location. The issue key will have an icon of 2 footprints next to it, and begin with "RHEL-" followed by an integer.  You can also find this issue by visiting https://issues.redhat.com/issues/?jql= and searching the "Bugzilla Bug" field for this BZ's number, e.g. a search like:

"Bugzilla Bug" = 1234567

In the event you have trouble locating or viewing this issue, you can file an issue by sending mail to rh-issues. You can also visit https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570 for general account information.