Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Sub‑clusters / super‑clusters - working :)
On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 3:47 PM Ulrich Windl wrote: > > >>> Antony Stone schrieb am 06.08.2021 um > 14:41 in > Nachricht <202108061441.59936.antony.st...@ha.open.source.it>: > ... > > location pref_A GroupA rule ‑inf: site ne cityA > > location pref_B GroupB rule ‑inf: site ne cityB > > I'm wondering whether the first is equivalentto > location pref_A GroupA rule inf: site eq cityA > No, it is not. The original constraint prohibits running resources anywhere except cityA even if cityA is not available; your version allows it if cityA is not available. ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Sub‑clusters / super‑clusters - working :)
On Friday 06 August 2021 at 14:47:03, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Antony Stone schrieb am 06.08.2021 um 14:41 > > > location pref_A GroupA rule ‑inf: site ne cityA > > location pref_B GroupB rule ‑inf: site ne cityB > > I'm wondering whether the first is equivalentto > location pref_A GroupA rule inf: site eq cityA I certainly believe it is. > In that case I think it's more clear (avoiding double negation). Fair point :) Antony. -- 3 logicians walk into a bar. The bartender asks "Do you all want a drink?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "Yes!" Please reply to the list; please *don't* CC me. ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
