Hi, On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 08:34:39AM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > by "shell" , you mean the crm api ? > > if so , where could I get the stand-alone release ?
rpms for several distributions are available at the openSUSE Build Service: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/network:/ha-clustering/ But if you're installing crmsh with the Pacemaker <= 1.1.7, then you'll need to enforce file overwrite (--replacefiles). Thanks, Dejan > 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
