Hi Florian, On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 02:03:19PM +0200, Florian Haas wrote: > On 2011-06-14 13:08, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > > Hi Alan, > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:32:02AM -0600, Alan Robertson wrote: > >> On 06/13/2011 04:12 AM, Simon Talbot wrote: > >>> A couple of observations (I am sure there are more) on the uniqueness > >>> flag for OCF script parameters: > >>> > >>> Would it be wise for the for the index parameter of the SFEX ocf script > >>> to have its unique flag set to 1 so that the crm tool (and others) would > >>> warn if one inadvertantly tried to create two SFEX resource primitives > >>> with the same index? > >>> > >>> Also, an example of the opposite, the Stonith/IPMI script, has parameters > >>> such as interface, username and password with their unique flags set to > >>> 1, causing erroneous warnings if you use the same interface, username or > >>> password for multiple IPMI stonith primitives, which of course if often > >>> the case in large clusters? > >>> > >> > >> When we designed it, we intended that Unique applies to the complete set > >> of parameters - not to individual parameters. It's like a multi-part > >> unique key. It takes all 3 to create a unique instance (for the example > >> you gave). > > > > That makes sense. > > Does it really? Then what would be the point of having some params that > are unique, and some that are not? Or would the tuple of _all_ > parameters marked as unique be considered unique?
Consider the example above for sfex. It has a device and index which together determine which part of the disk the RA should use. Only the device:index tuple must be unique. Currently, neither device nor index is a unique parameter (in the meta-data). Otherwise we'd have false positives for the following configuration: disk1:1 disk1:2 disk2:1 disk2:2 Now, stuff such as configfile and pidfile obviously both must be unique independently of each other. There are probably other examples of both kinds. Cheers, Dejan > Florian > > _______________________________________________________ > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
