Hi I've looked for a crm standalone rpm on github/clusterlabs, but unsuccessfully ... Could somebody here give me a clue ? ;-)
Thanks Alain De : Andrew Beekhof <[email protected]> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> Date : 30/07/2012 10:23 Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered resources as described in Pacemaker doc ? Envoyé par : [email protected] On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:34 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > by "shell" , you mean the crm api ? I mean the bit that looks like: crm configure ... > > if so , where could I get the stand-alone release ? I don't recall off the top of my head, there is a link to it from the clusterlabs/pacemaker github page. > > Thanks again > Alain > > > > De : Andrew Beekhof <[email protected]> > A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> > Date : 30/07/2012 08:30 > Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered > resources as described in Pacemaker doc ? > Envoyé par : [email protected] > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 3:58 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Andrew >> sorry but I don't understand what you mean by "the stand-alone version > of >> the shell" ? > > The shell is now a separate project. > >> Thanks >> Alain >> >> >> >> De : Andrew Beekhof <[email protected]> >> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> >> Date : 30/07/2012 05:59 >> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered >> resources as described in Pacemaker doc ? >> Envoyé par : [email protected] >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:02 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I've found in the mailing-list messages the syntax I could have written >>> with crm configure edit , something like : >>> order order-g-FS inf: ( fs-A fs-B fs-C fs-D fs-E ) ( exportfs-fs-A >>> exportfs-fs-B exportfs-fs-C exportfs-fs-D exportfs-fs-E ) >>> right ? >>> But with my pacemaker release , crm configure edit returns a syntax >> error >>> around the first "(" >>> so I think it is not supported with my release 1.1.5-5 , right ? >> >> You probably want to be using the stand-alone version of the shell. >> Its likely to be far more up-to-date than the bundled one. >> >>> >>> Thanks for confirmation. >>> Regards >>> Alain >>> >>> >>> >>> De : [email protected] >>> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> >>> Date : 27/07/2012 12:47 >>> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered >>> resources as described in Pacemaker doc ? >>> Envoyé par : [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> OK for mount of FS , that's not the real thing which matters for me, >>> but I'm quite sure that the parallelisation of exportfs stop, when the >>> OCF_RESKEY_wait_for_leasetime is set, is >>> valuable and even quite mandatory, as I do not want to add the sleep of >>> the 5 exportfs even with a reduced value >>> for the wait_for_leastime which is 90s by default. I would like to set >> it >>> to around 10s, but in parallel for the 5 exportfs. >>> Without paralleization, NFS clients will for sure get timeouts before >> the >>> end of migration of the FS and exportfs resource group. >>> >>> Anyway, my question was more about the configuration of 6.6 example > than >>> the behavior of server nfs in HA ... ;-) >>> >>> Regards >>> Alain >>> >>> >>> >>> De : "Ulrich Windl" <[email protected]> >>> A : <[email protected]> >>> Date : 27/07/2012 11:47 >>> Objet : [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered >>> resources as described in Pacemaker doc ? >>> Envoyé par : [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> While your idea sounds good, I doubt whether parallel mounts being > tried >>> are actually being performed in parallel, just as the exportfs >> operations. >>> >>> They all access some common data structures in the kernel, I guess. In >>> that case, the timeout values may need adjustments. >>> >>> Despite of that some RAs may show amazing behavior if executed in >> parallel >>> >>> (I guess) ;-) >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ulrich >>> >>>>>> <[email protected]> schrieb am 27.07.2012 um 09:15 in Nachricht >>> <of7cf1dd89.6edcc5c6-onc1257a48.0025bf70-c1257a48.0027c...@bull.net>: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> For now I had a group with several Filesystem resources followed by > the >>>> exportfs like this : >>>> group g-FS-EXPORTED fs-A fs-B fs-C fs-D fs-E exportfs-fs-A >>> >>> >>>> exportfs-fs-B exportfs-fs-C exportfs-fs-D exportfs-fs-E \ >>>> >>>> Now, I would like to have all the FS mounted before all the exportfs >> BUT >>> >>> >>>> with sequential=false for all Filesystem primitives and >> sequential=false >>> >>> >>>> also for all exportfs primitives. >>>> >>>> I saw in the Pacemaker Configuration Explained documentation the >>>> Example 6.11. Ordered sets of unordered resources >>>> with two ressources A & B starting in parallel and before two >> ressources >>> >>> C >>>> & D starting also starting in parallel. I think this >>>> is exactly what I need. >>>> >>>> But : >>>> >>>> 1/ I have to remove the group configuration g-FS-EXPORTED , right ? >>>> or could I have such constraints "inside" the group itself ? >>>> (based on documentation, I don't think so) >>>> >>>> 2/ How can I enter the ordered set of unordered resources in the >>>> configuration ? >>>> (in documentation, the examples are given in xml, whereas we can't >>> edit >>>> the xml cib file, >>>> and in crm configure order, I can't see the way to do it : >>>> usage: order <id> score-type: <first-rsc>[:<action>] >>>> <then-rsc>[:<action>] [symmetrical=<bool>] >>>> >>>> 3/ After this configuration, that means that I can't manage the start >> or >>> >>> >>>> stop of all these resources with only one command >>>> as it was the case with the group ? meaning that I have to launch >> a >>> >>> >>>> start command on the 10 primitives ? instead of >>>> the start command on the group ? >>>> >>>> Thanks for your help on this. >>>> Alain >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
