On 08/24/11 17:38, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
23.08.2011 12:19, Gao,Yan wrote:
[snip]
When allocating every resource, we compare the capacity of the nodes.
The node has more remaining capacity is preferred. This would be quite
clear if we only define one kind of capacity. While if we define
23.08.2011 12:19, Gao,Yan wrote:
[snip]
When allocating every resource, we compare the capacity of the nodes.
The node has more remaining capacity is preferred. This would be quite
clear if we only define one kind of capacity. While if we define
multiple kinds of capacity, for example:
If
On 08/22/11 22:09, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
Hi Yan,
27.04.2011 08:14, Yan Gao wrote:
[snip]
Do priorities work for utilization strategy?
Yes, the improvement works for utilization, minimal and balanced
strategy:
- The nodes that are more healthy and have more capacities get consumed
Hi Yan,
27.04.2011 08:14, Yan Gao wrote:
[snip]
Do priorities work for utilization strategy?
Yes, the improvement works for utilization, minimal and balanced
strategy:
- The nodes that are more healthy and have more capacities get consumed
first (globally preferred nodes).
Does this still
Hi, Andrew
I confirmed that a problem was revised.
Many thanks!!
Yuusuke
(2011/07/19 10:42), Andrew Beekhof wrote:
This should also now be fixed in:
http://hg.clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/devel/rev/960a7e3da680
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Yuusuke IIDAiiday...@intellilink.co.jp wrote:
This should also now be fixed in:
http://hg.clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/devel/rev/960a7e3da680
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Yuusuke IIDA iiday...@intellilink.co.jp wrote:
Hi, Andrew
I know that there is the next processing in pengine.
# cat -n pengine/utils.c
[snip]
322 /* now
On 07/05/11 12:34, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Gao,Yan y...@novell.com wrote:
On 06/01/11 18:51, Yuusuke IIDA wrote:
Hi, Yan
An answer becomes slow, and really I'm sorry.
(2011/05/13 15:06), Gao,Yan wrote:
I understand that you think the improvement for the
On 06/01/11 18:51, Yuusuke IIDA wrote:
Hi, Yan
An answer becomes slow, and really I'm sorry.
(2011/05/13 15:06), Gao,Yan wrote:
I understand that you think the improvement for the non-default
placement strategy makes sense to the default too. Though the
default is somewhat intended not
Hi, Yan
An answer becomes slow, and really I'm sorry.
(2011/05/13 15:06), Gao,Yan wrote:
I understand that you think the improvement for the non-default
placement strategy makes sense to the default too. Though the
default is somewhat intended not to be affected by any placement
strategy so
Hi Yuusuke,
On 05/12/11 19:56, Yuusuke IIDA wrote:
Hi Yan,
I tested the correction.
The problem that I reported was improved by the correction that you
performed.
Great, thanks for doing that!
When I tested it, I found a different problem.
When I set placement-strategy=default, it
Hi Yan,
I tested the correction.
The problem that I reported was improved by the correction that you performed.
When I tested it, I found a different problem.
When I set placement-strategy=default, it is a problem that a function to
disperse does not commit placement by the number of the
Hi, Yan
Thank you for good work!
I test it.
Please wait for a while.
Regards,
Yuusuke
(2011/04/27 13:32), Yan Gao wrote:
Hi Yuusuke,
On 04/19/11 19:55, Yan Gao wrote:
Actually I've been optimizing the placement-strategy lately. It will
sort the resource processing order according to the
Hi Yuusuke,
On 04/19/11 19:55, Yan Gao wrote:
Actually I've been optimizing the placement-strategy lately. It will
sort the resource processing order according to the priorities and
scores of resources. That should result in ideal placement. Stay tuned.
The improvement of the placement
Hi Yan,
27.04.2011 07:32, Yan Gao wrote:
Hi Yuusuke,
On 04/19/11 19:55, Yan Gao wrote:
Actually I've been optimizing the placement-strategy lately. It will
sort the resource processing order according to the priorities and
scores of resources. That should result in ideal placement. Stay
Hi Vladislav,
On 04/27/11 12:49, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
Hi Yan,
27.04.2011 07:32, Yan Gao wrote:
Hi Yuusuke,
On 04/19/11 19:55, Yan Gao wrote:
Actually I've been optimizing the placement-strategy lately. It will
sort the resource processing order according to the priorities and
Yan is our utilization expert, lets see if he can provide some
direction here :-)
-- Andrew
2011/4/18 Yuusuke IIDA iiday...@intellilink.co.jp:
Hi, Andrew
I want to disperse using a resource placement strategy function of
Pacemaker-1.1
in the fail-over point of the resource in N to N
On 04/18/11 18:17, Yuusuke IIDA wrote:
* When it is not dispersed well
When I produced trouble in a resource in order of next, I am partial, and the
resource is placed in one node.
main_rsc3 - main_rsc2 - main_rsc1
Online: [srv-b1 srv-b2 srv-a1]
Full list of resources:
main_rsc1
17 matches
Mail list logo
