Hi Andrew
sorry but I don't understand what you mean by "the stand-alone version of
the shell" ?
Thanks
Alain
De : Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net>
A : General Linux-HA mailing list <linux-ha@lists.linux-ha.org>
Date : 30/07/2012 05:59
Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered
resources as described in Pacemaker doc ?
Envoyé par : linux-ha-boun...@lists.linux-ha.org
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:02 PM, <alain.mou...@bull.net> wrote:
> I've found in the mailing-list messages the syntax I could have written
> with crm configure edit , something like :
> order order-g-FS inf: ( 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 )
> right ?
> But with my pacemaker release , crm configure edit returns a syntax
error
> around the first "("
> so I think it is not supported with my release 1.1.5-5 , right ?
You probably want to be using the stand-alone version of the shell.
Its likely to be far more up-to-date than the bundled one.
>
> Thanks for confirmation.
> Regards
> Alain
>
>
>
> De : alain.mou...@bull.net
> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <linux-ha@lists.linux-ha.org>
> Date : 27/07/2012 12:47
> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered
> resources as described in Pacemaker doc ?
> Envoyé par : linux-ha-boun...@lists.linux-ha.org
>
>
>
> Hi,
> OK for mount of FS , that's not the real thing which matters for me,
> but I'm quite sure that the parallelisation of exportfs stop, when the
> OCF_RESKEY_wait_for_leasetime is set, is
> valuable and even quite mandatory, as I do not want to add the sleep of
> the 5 exportfs even with a reduced value
> for the wait_for_leastime which is 90s by default. I would like to set
it
> to around 10s, but in parallel for the 5 exportfs.
> Without paralleization, NFS clients will for sure get timeouts before
the
> end of migration of the FS and exportfs resource group.
>
> Anyway, my question was more about the configuration of 6.6 example than
> the behavior of server nfs in HA ... ;-)
>
> Regards
> Alain
>
>
>
> De : "Ulrich Windl" <ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
> A : <linux-ha@lists.linux-ha.org>
> Date : 27/07/2012 11:47
> Objet : [Linux-HA] Antw: How to configure ordered sets of unordered
> resources as described in Pacemaker doc ?
> Envoyé par : linux-ha-boun...@lists.linux-ha.org
>
>
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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
