On 03/07/2013, at 7:11 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote:
> 02.07.2013 14:55, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> >> On 02/07/2013, at 8:14 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote: >> >>> 02.07.2013 12:27, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: >>>> On 2013-07-02T11:05:01, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> One thing I see immediately, is that node utilization attributes are >>>>> deleted after I do 'load update' with empty node utilization sections. >>>>> That is probably not specific to this patch. >>>> >>>> Yes, that isn't specific to that. >>>> >>>>> I have that attributes dynamic, set from a RA (as node configuration may >>>>> vary, I prefer to detect how much CPU and RAM I have and set utilization >>>>> accordingly rather then put every hardware change into CIB). >>>> >>>>> Or may be it is possible to use transient utilization attributes? >>>>> I don't think so... Ugh, that would be nice. >>>> >>>> Yes, that's exactly what you need here. >>> >>> I know, but I do not expect that to be implemented soon. Together with >>> cluster-wide attributes for which I use hack with tickets now. But >>> tickets currently are quite limited - they have only 4 states, so it is >>> impossible to put f.e. number there. >>> >>> I fully understand Andrew's point when he is unwilling to implement >>> features for just two setups, so... >> >> What feature am I not considering here? I don't follow. > > I didn't ask about that yet. Just assuming what your possible reaction > could be. :) I don't even know what I'm thinking half the time, I'd not recommend trying to guess :) No fundamental objection to such a feature, but I'd be reluctant to add it until we get an attrd that was truly atomic. That code is mostly bandages and sticky tape. > Support for transient utilization attributes, which do not go to config > section, but to state section. I would say that is overkill to implement > that (and somehow merge two sections when doing utilization calculation) > if nobody except me is affected by absence of that. > > F.e. I need to do CIB update (think of it as of full replace), because I > generate crmsh configuration with custom template-based system. And I > have some RAs which set utilization attributes on nodes. > Now, when I apply my full brand new config to a cluster after making > some changes here and there, that attributes are lost. > > Transient utilization attributes would help me (I would use them in my RAs). > But, I wouldn't say that is a common setup. That's why I assume you > won't be a fan of implementing them. > >> >>> Probably I need to extend crmsh with >>> site-specific patch until that is implemented. That would be acceptable >>> work-around for me... And chance to learn python nevertheless ;) > > _______________________________________________ > 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
