mirror of https://github.com/Icinga/icinga2.git
Merge pull request #10204 from Icinga/an-HA
doc/: fix "a HA" -> "an HA"
This commit is contained in:
commit
4ca68e444e
|
@ -3131,7 +3131,7 @@ object Endpoint "icinga2-master2.localdomain" {
|
|||
> **Note**
|
||||
>
|
||||
> This is required if you decide to change an already running single endpoint production
|
||||
> environment into a HA-enabled cluster zone with two endpoints.
|
||||
> environment into an HA-enabled cluster zone with two endpoints.
|
||||
> The [initial setup](06-distributed-monitoring.md#distributed-monitoring-scenarios-ha-master-clients)
|
||||
> with 2 HA masters doesn't require this step.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -878,7 +878,7 @@ actively attempts to schedule and execute checks. Otherwise the node does not fe
|
|||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You may ask why this analysis is important? Fair enough - if the numbers are not inverted in a HA zone
|
||||
You may ask why this analysis is important? Fair enough - if the numbers are not inverted in an HA zone
|
||||
with two members, this may give a hint that the cluster nodes are in a split-brain scenario, or you've
|
||||
found a bug in the cluster.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ authority = endpoints[Utility::SDBM(object->GetName()) % endpoints.size()] == my
|
|||
that by querying the `paused` attribute for all objects via REST API
|
||||
or debug console on both endpoints.
|
||||
|
||||
Endpoints inside a HA zone calculate the object authority independent from each other.
|
||||
Endpoints inside an HA zone calculate the object authority independent from each other.
|
||||
This object authority is important for selected features explained below.
|
||||
|
||||
Since features are configuration objects too, you must ensure that all nodes
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ Checkable::ProcessingResult Checkable::ProcessCheckResult(const CheckResult::Ptr
|
|||
// Don't recompute the next check when the current check isn't generated by this endpoint. When the check is
|
||||
// remotely generated we should've already received the "SetNextCheck" event before the "event::CheckResult"
|
||||
// cluster event. Otherwise, the next check received before this check will be invalidated and cause the Checkable
|
||||
// "next_check/next_update" in a HA setup to always be different from the other endpoint as the "m_SchedulingOffset"
|
||||
// "next_check/next_update" in an HA setup to always be different from the other endpoint as the "m_SchedulingOffset"
|
||||
// is randomly initialised on each node.
|
||||
if (!origin) {
|
||||
if (cr->GetActive()) {
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue