On 2013-02-06T10:45:21, Ulrich Windl <[email protected]> wrote:
> colocation col_OCFS_cVG inf: _rsc_set_ ( cln_CFS ) cln_cLVM
> order ord_cVG_CFS inf: cln_cLVM ( cln_CFS )
Why not just:
colocation col_OCFS_cVG inf: cln_CFS cln_cLVM
order ord_cVG_CFS inf: cln_cLVM cln_CFS
That ought to work. Probably clones and resource sets have a problem
here?
> DLM (Distributed Lock Manager)
> O2CB (OCFS2), needs DLM
> cLVM needs DLM
> LVM-LV needs cLVM
> OCFS2-filesystem needs both, O2CB and LVM-LV
>
> The pattern should be flexible enough to allow both, OFCS on top of an LV, as
> well as OCFS directly on a shared disk. And the pattern should only define
> contraints that are necessary, i.e. do not put everything in a group and
> clone that group.
The latter is the easiest solution that just works; where's the problem
with that? Too simple? ;-)
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
