Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
Jan Pokorný writes: >> 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? > > 0x > > keeps me at guess what it was meant to/could be used for in practice > (had some ideas but will gladly be surprised if anyone's going to > give it a crack) > The background for this feature as far as I understand it was related to booth-based geo clusters, where the tag feature made it easier to unify the configuration of two geo clusters. Hawk also supports the tag feature via the user interface, where you can get a custom status view for a tag showing only the tagged resources instead of the whole cluster status. I honestly don't know how much use it sees in practice. Cheers, Kristoffer -- // Kristoffer Grönlund // kgronl...@suse.com ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
Jan Pokorný wrote: On 31/05/18 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. Time to thank to the people (totalling 2) I've heard back from that responded positively to at least a single box below. OK, now I feel guilty so here's another set of answers. Just a short summary: 1. [ ] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or their UI counterparts)? No, I co-developed the part of our product which automatically configures clusters using higher-level software. We have a library which calls out to crm to do that. 2. [ ] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in CIB? Nope. 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? Nope. 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? Nope, didn't even know about it! ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
On 31/05/18 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: > I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, > please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective > knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively > in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). > > Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. Time to thank to the people (totalling 2) I've heard back from that responded positively to at least a single box below. Just a short summary: > 1. [ ] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or > their UI counterparts)? 2x either as primary or a fallback way to reach something in the configuration > 2. [ ] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in CIB? 2x makes configuration easier/terser (possibly even "dramatically") > 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? 0x looks like this feature never picked up momentum, no wonder there are lurking bugs, e.g. https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/pull/1511 > 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got > unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" > equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? already explained that the arrangement for upgrade of the configuration schema instance to the 3.x line of the schemas will go the extra mile to circumvent possible dicrepancies, so the gist of this terse expression will remain regardless > 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? 0x keeps me at guess what it was meant to/could be used for in practice (had some ideas but will gladly be surprised if anyone's going to give it a crack) > (Some of these questions tangentially touch the topic of perhaps > excessively complex means of configuration that was raised during > the 2017's cluster summit.) > > [1] > https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_reusing_resource_definitions > [2] > https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#s-reusing-config-elements > [3] > https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_tagging_configuration_elements -- Poki pgpdKejwerdnY.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
Jan Pokorný writes: > 1. [X] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or > their UI counterparts)? For debugging one has to understand the CIB anyway, so why learn additional syntaxes? :) Most of our configuration changes are scripted via a home-grown domain-specific CLI. Using crmsh or pcs under the hood instead of cibadmin and crm_resource would bring additional dependencies and require additional knowledge (of these tools). > 2. [X] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in CIB? This allows changing templated resource parameters at a single place. > 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? > > 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got > unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" > equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? > > 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? -- Regards, Feri ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
Hi, On 31.05.2018 15:48, Jan Pokorný wrote: Hello, I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. 1. [x] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or their UI counterparts)? Very rare, but sometimes it is the only way. 2. [x] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in CIB? This is not only simplification, but allows to drastically reduce CIB size. 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? (Some of these questions tangentially touch the topic of perhaps excessively complex means of configuration that was raised during the 2017's cluster summit.) [1] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_reusing_resource_definitions [2] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#s-reusing-config-elements [3] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_tagging_configuration_elements ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
On 31/05/18 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: > I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, > please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective > knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively > in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). I am not sure how to interpret no feedback so far -- does it mean that those features are indeed used only very sparsely, or is the questionnaire not as welcoming as it could be? This is definitely not the last time the userbase's feedback is of help, so the more pleasant we can do such enquiries, the better turnaround, I guess. > Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. > > 1. [ ] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or > their UI counterparts)? Putting seriousness aside for a bit, there's a relevant anecdotical reference directly from pacemaker's own codebase: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/blob/Pacemaker-2.0.0-rc5/Makefile.common#L54 :-) As Ken noted, crm shell may support all of 2. + 3. + 4., it was just my extension that those could be especially handy with direct XML-level control, as shifting towards more abstract thinking about the configuration may actually conflict with the goal of straightforward conceptual comprehension, at least in case of 3. > 2. [ ] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in CIB? > > 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? > > 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got > unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" > equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? This was a premature worst-case conclusion on my end (generally, I think it's better to start pessimistically only to be pleased later on, rather than vice-versa). In fact, there's nothing that would prevent reversibility of temporary limited-scope "id-refs" exploding, in an unfold-upgrade-refold manner, sorry for the noise (https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/pull/1500). However, you can take this also as discussion-worth probe into how mere _syntactic_ changes not affecting the behaviour (i.e. the semantics encoded with either syntactic expressions) whatsoever would be perceived. In this now merely theoretic case, parts of information that only have bearing on user's comprehension would be lost (multiple duplicate entities as opposed to shared single point of control) and the question hence is: How much frustration could arise from such semantics-preserving interventions inflicted with schema upgrades or elsewhere? Is this something we should avoid at all costs so as not to alienate not even a single user, or is there some extent of tolerance as long as you can hardly tell a difference in higher-level tools? > 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? The original questions are still valid, feel free to respond to them or to the new bunch at your convenience. It will help to shape future directions for pacemaker. -- Jan (Poki) pgpJbth36Z1Tt.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
On 31/05/18 11:42 -0500, Ken Gaillot wrote: > On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: >> I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, >> please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective >> knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively >> in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). >> >> Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. >> >> 1. [ ] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or >> their UI counterparts)? > > To clarify, crm shell supports both templates and id-ref, while pcs > does not. No implications were intended, nor expressed. I am (possibly we are) interested in the original question regardless how other questions are answered -- please do so as the reply to the original post, if you wish to participate. -- Jan (Poki) pgpAXs8WRNmNk.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
Re: [ClusterLabs] [questionnaire] Do you manage your pacemaker configuration by hand and (if so) what reusability features do you use?
On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote: > Hello, > > I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions, > please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective > knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively > in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]"). > > Any other commentary also welcome -- thank you in advance. > > 1. [ ] Do you edit CIB by hand (as opposed to relying on crm/pcs or > their UI counterparts)? To clarify, crm shell supports both templates and id-ref, while pcs does not. > 2. [ ] Do you use "template" based syntactic simplification[1] in > CIB? > > 3. [ ] Do you use "id-ref" based syntactic simplification[2] in CIB? > > 3.1 [ ] When positive about 3., would you mind much if "id-refs" got > unfold/exploded during the "cibadmin --upgrade --force" > equivalent as a reliability/safety precaution? Regardless of whether anyone minds, we're not going to do it. It would render the feature useless and force any user using it to either abandon it or perform potentially massive manual edits to their CIB. If the community feels that id-ref is not a useful feature, we can deprecate it, and in some future release, drop support and automatically expand it as part of the upgrade transform for that release. Otherwise we will continue full support for it. > 4. [ ] Do you use "tag" based syntactic grouping[3] in CIB? > > > (Some of these questions tangentially touch the topic of perhaps > excessively complex means of configuration that was raised during > the 2017's cluster summit.) > > [1] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-si > ngle/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_reusing_resource_definitions > [2] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-si > ngle/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#s-reusing-config-elements > [3] https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html- > single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#_tagging_configuration_elements -- Ken Gaillot ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
