>>>> Ken Gaillot <[email protected]> schrieb am 29.03.2022 um 01:25 in > Nachricht > <[email protected]>: >> On Mon, 2022â03â28 at 17:26 â0400, john tillman wrote: >>> > On Mon, 2022â03â28 at 14:03 â0400, john tillman wrote: >>> > > Greetings all, >>> > > >>> > > Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I >>> > > can't >>> > > find >>> > > one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google. >>> > > >>> > > I have several Filesystem resource and one nfs service >>> > > resource. If >>> > > I >>> > > create 3 order constraints: >>> > > pcs constraint order start fsRsc1 then start myNfsServiceRsc >>> > > pcs constraint order start fsRsc2 then start myNfsServiceRsc >>> > > pcs constraint order start fsRsc3 then start myNfsServiceRsc >>> > > >>> > > I would like to make sure that the nfs service will be started >>> > > even >>> > > if one >>> > > of the Filesystem resources fails to start. Is there a timeout >>> > > that >>> > > could >>> > > be used? >>> > > >>> > > There is the "kind=Optional" parameter but that looks like it >>> > > will >>> > > immediately start the second resource if the first failed to >>> > > start. There >>> > > is no timeout option. >>> > > >>> > > Best regards, >>> > > âJohn >>> > > >>> > >>> > How do you envision the timeout working? >>> > >>> > You can add a timeout for the ordering itself using rules, where >>> > the >>> > ordering no longer applies after a certain date/time, but it >>> > doesn't >>> > sound like that's what you want. >>> > ââ >>> > Ken Gaillot <[email protected]> >>> > >>> >>> Thank you for the reply, Ken. >>> >>> I was hoping that I could give the Filesystem resource "X" seconds to >>> start. If it failed to start after "X" then I would start the nfs >>> service >>> anyway. So Those Filesystems that successfully started could be >>> accessed, >>> albeit with a bit of a delay before nfs is started. >>> >>> Basically, I want to start the nfs service regardless of whether any >>> or >>> all of the Filesystem resources started. But I want to give them all >>> a >>> chance start before starting nfs. >>> >>> That said, it doesn't look like the rules suggestion you made is what >>> I >>> need. Any other ideas? >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> âJohn >>> >> >> I don't think there is a way to do that except maybe with customizing >> the filesystem resource agent. > > Hi! > > I'm not sure, but isn't there a mechanism like "start a set of resources > first, then start another one". > What is probably wanted is to ignore the failure of some of those set > members. > So I wonder: What use is HA if the guarantee is "the filesystem might be > there"? > Still: what about on-fail=ignore (for start) for those filesystems that > aren't > considered essential? > > Regards, > Ulrich > >
Ulrich, Thank you for the suggestion of "on-fail". I'll review the docs on this. I tried working with a "set" of resources before with mixed success. I will consider it again. -John >> >> If you customized the agent, you could have it set a transient node >> attribute (like fsâ<RESOURCE ID>) when attempting to start, regardless >> of whether it succeeded or failed. Then you could configure a location >> constraint for the nfs server using a rule that allows the nfs server >> to run only on a node where all three node attributes have been >> defined. >> ââ >> Ken Gaillot <[email protected]> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Manage your subscription: >> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > > Ken, Thank you for the suggestion but that sounds more complicated than I am ready to attempt. -John > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
