Hi, On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:45:24AM +0200, Maloja01 wrote: > On 08/18/2011 12:19 PM, Ulrich Windl wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Reading the docs, I learned that pacemaker understands more complex > > dependencies than "group" where resources are strictly sequential. For > > example one could start a set of resources in parallel, then wait until all > > are done, then start another set of resources, etc. > > > > Now I wonder: > > 1) Can such a thing (i.e. parallelism) be configured with crm shell? If so, > > what is the syntax like? > > If you have two resources like primitives and they do not have any order > constraints (neither explizit by a order constraint nor implizit by > membership in group) such resources are assumed be > "startable"/"stopable" in parallel and the cluster will do not have any > peferences about the order.
I guess that he meant resource sets. There's a slight confusion regarding those and they were to be reimplemented/redefined in CRM. Don't know what's the current status. > > 2) In some resource groups, not all resources are really required. For > > example in a RAID1, only one of both legs is really required to start up > > the RAID (assuming I need to activate some extra resource for each leg of > > the RAID). Can such a dependency be expressed in CRM? If so, how do you do > > it? > > Beside the fact that I do not see the both legs/ 2 x single leg > ressources for RAID1 I would say yes that possible but will increase > the complexity of the cluster and the most important idea behind > clustering is: "keep it simple". In your case the critical point could > be the "OR" in the oredring of costraints. > > All resouces after your 2 legs solution could be started, if Leg1 OR > Leg2 is up. Maybe that has to be described via ordering constraints. That cannot be described currently, i.e. start B if at least one of A1 and A2 are running. Thanks, Dejan > > I'd wish (I know what you will reply ;-)) that could be expressed with the > > crm shell. > really? - why I wrote my answer, if you already knew it ;-) > > > > > Regards, > > Ulrich > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-HA mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
