On 11/12/2012 12:01 PM, Simon Grinberg wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com>
To: "Eli Mesika" <emes...@redhat.com>
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 11:47:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Design for 3.2 RFE] Improving proxy selection
algorithm for Power Management operations
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 06:18:53AM -0500, Eli Mesika wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eli Mesika" <emes...@redhat.com>
To: "Itamar Heim" <ih...@redhat.com>
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 12:06:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Design for 3.2 RFE] Improving proxy
selection algorithm for Power Management operations
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <ih...@redhat.com>
To: "Eli Mesika" <emes...@redhat.com>
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>, "Michael
Pasternak"
<mpast...@redhat.com>, "Simon Grinberg"
<sgrin...@redhat.com>, "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 12:02:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] [Design for 3.2 RFE] Improving
proxy
selection algorithm for Power Management operations
On 11/09/2012 10:52 AM, Eli Mesika wrote:
> FenceWrapper
i understand danken suggested going this way, rather than
than
another
instance of vdsm.
is vdsm only calling these scripts today and all logic is
in
engine,
or
does vdsm has any logic in wrapping these scripts (not a
blocker
to
doing FenceWrapper, just worth extracting that logic from
vdsm
to
such a
script, then using it in both. i hope answer is 'no
logic'...)
vdsm has some logic that maps between the call passed to it
from
engine and the actual parameters generated for the script.
AFAIK, this logic only "builds" the correct arguments for the
command according to the agent type
can we extract it to an external wrapper?
I'd hate to fix bugs/changes twice for this.
I'll check it with danken on SUN
Well, looked at it a bit , the VDSM code is in fenceNote function
in API.py
What I think is that we can exclude the fenceNote implementation to
a separate fence.py file and call it from the API.py
Then we can use one of the following in Java to call the method
from fence.py
1) jython
2) org.python.util.PythonInterpreter
See
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8898765/calling-python-in-java
danken, what do you think ?
BTW, no one has promised the the fence script is implemented in
Python
$ file `which fence_ipmilan `
/usr/sbin/fence_ipmilan: ELF 64-bit LSB executable...
PS, if it's really that complex I don't see the a big issue dropping engine
fence
It is mostly useful when you have small number of hosts, or collection of small
clusters where the admin limits the hosts that are allowed to fence to cluster
hosts and as a failsafe the 'engine'
*It does however solves at the same time the issue that we (still) can't
'Approve a host have been rebooted' if it's the last host in the DC since the
path goes through the fencing logic.
exactly, we need to allow engine fence to solve the single/last host
private case.
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
