Bug 829356
Summary: | Transport options need better docs | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Jaroslav Kortus <jkortus> |
Component: | corosync | Assignee: | Jan Friesse <jfriesse> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Cluster QE <mspqa-list> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 7.0 | CC: | sdake |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-06-06 14:59:07 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jaroslav Kortus
2012-06-06 14:33:27 UTC
Jardo, corosync man page is up to date. Cluster RNG will go (because it's part of cman and that will go) and there will be corosync RNG. Only difference I see is udpb which is udp + broadcast (and internally by cman this is converted to broadcast: yes and transport: udp). Both udp and broadcast are documented and can be used without any problems by user. I'm closing bug as notabug. If you will feel there should be some kind of additional info, please reopen bug. Thanks for the explanation. The iba and rdma options are also "translated" in a similar way? rdma (in cman) = iba (in corosync). Plan (in corosync) is not use rdma, but rather directly iba (ibverbs) to achieve higher network throughput (iba should be like UDP, rdma is like TCP), but it's not sure if we will be able to finish such support in FC18 / RHEL 7 GA. But this is reason for different names in cman vs. corosync (cman describes real state (because of no future of it), corosync describes future (because it hopefully has some ;) ). |