Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • Interesting point about the timers. The info we get from list-timers, though, is already pretty good to understand whether your usage of the timers is correct or not. Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 21:10
  • 1
    Not in my case. I would like to use the exact same configuration on twin hosts, but use AccuracySec= to ensure that both aren't doing maintence at the same time. I would like to see when the timers will actually fire on each host, but can't. Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 0:40
  • Ah. I have similar problems. I would use a selected master (using a vote system) and the master sends a message "do maintenance" to computer 1, once computer 1 is done, it reports its new status to the master which then asks computer 2 to do its maintenance, etc. One of those computers would of course be the master, but the code running the maintenance loop should be separate from the actual maintenance. One problem to keep in mind. If your cluster is to grow quite a bit remember that it takes time and it could be so long that some computers do not get updated for a long time! Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 1:14