Hi!

While your idea sounds good, I doubt whether parallel mounts being tried are 
actually being performed in parallel, just as the exportfs operations. They all 
access some common data structures in the kernel, I guess. In that case, the 
timeout values may need adjustments.

Despite of that some RAs may show amazing behavior if executed in parallel (I 
guess) ;-)

Regards,
Ulrich

>>> <alain.mou...@bull.net> schrieb am 27.07.2012 um 09:15 in Nachricht
<of7cf1dd89.6edcc5c6-onc1257a48.0025bf70-c1257a48.0027c...@bull.net>:
> Hi
> 
> For now I had a group with several Filesystem resources followed by the 
> exportfs like this :
> group g-FS-EXPORTED    fs-A   fs-B   fs-C   fs-D   fs-E    exportfs-fs-A 
> exportfs-fs-B  exportfs-fs-C exportfs-fs-D  exportfs-fs-E \
> 
> Now, I would like to have all the FS mounted before all the exportfs BUT 
> with sequential=false for all Filesystem primitives and sequential=false 
> also for all exportfs primitives.
> 
> I saw in the Pacemaker Configuration Explained documentation the 
> Example 6.11. Ordered sets of unordered resources
> with two ressources A & B starting in parallel and before two ressources C 
> & D starting also starting in parallel. I think this
> is exactly what I need. 
> 
> But : 
> 
> 1/ I have to remove the group configuration g-FS-EXPORTED , right ?
>         or could I have such constraints "inside" the group itself ? 
> (based on documentation, I don't think so)
> 
> 2/ How can I enter the ordered set of unordered resources in the 
> configuration ? 
>    (in documentation, the examples are given in xml, whereas we can't edit 
> the xml cib file,
>     and in crm configure order, I can't see the way to do it : 
>         usage: order <id> score-type: <first-rsc>[:<action>] 
> <then-rsc>[:<action>]   [symmetrical=<bool>]
> 
> 3/ After this configuration, that means that I can't manage the start or 
> stop of all these resources with only one command 
>     as it was the case with the group  ? meaning that I have to launch a 
> start command on the 10 primitives ? instead of 
>     the start command on the group ?
> 
> Thanks for your help on this.
> Alain
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org 
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha 
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems 
> 

 
 

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to