On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:55:32 +0100 Michael Schwartzkopff <m...@sys4.de> wrote:
> Order for colocations and order constraints: Please don't do it. > Everybody got use to the ordering as it is now. It also makes sense. > Please remember the irritations we had moving from heartbeat 2.0 > (with XML, shudder) to the new pacemaker/crm syntax and constraint > orders. I don't want to have that again. This worries me as well, however the current syntax for constraints is confusing and error-prone. It would be great to be able to do something to make this easier to use, but exactly what it would be is hard to say. Making a change that would silently invert the functionality of existing configurations is, I agree, not a good idea. However, maybe it would be acceptable if a "version: 2" header is required in the document to enable the new syntax? Yet another option is to come up with some entirely new construct to supplement colocation and order which does what I think most people intuitively expects by default, which is enforces both colocation and ordering, so that 'foo depends on bar' means foo will start after bar, and only where bar is running. -- // Kristoffer Grönlund // kgronl...@suse.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
