On 1/12/21 8:23 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>> Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> schrieb am 11.01.2021 um 16:45 in >>>> Nachricht > <3e78312a1c92cde0a1cdd82c2fed33a679f63770.ca...@redhat.com>: > > ... >>>> from growing indefinitely). (Plus some timing issues to consider.) >>> Wouldn't a temporary local status variable do also? > Hi Ken, > > I appreciate your comments. > >> No, the scheduler is stateless. All information that the scheduler >> needs must be contained within the CIB. >> >> The main advantages of that approach are (1) the scheduler can crash >> and respawn without causing any problems; (2) the DC can be changed to > I think it's nice when being able to recover smoothly after a crash, but > program design should not be biased towards frequent crashes ;-) > >> another node at any time without causing any problems; and (3) saved > Well, if every status update is stored in the CIB (as it seems to be), > changing DCs shouln't be a bug problem until there are multiple at the same > time. > >> CIBs can be replayed for debugging and testing purposes with the >> identical result as a live cluster. > Are you talking about the whole CIB, or about the configuration section of > the CIB? I can't see any sense of replacing the status section of the CIB > unless you want to debug resource recovery and probing. That is the whole CIB. All the scheduler regression tests are working like that. Feed the CIB into crm_simulate and see what it does.
Klaus > > ... > > Regards, > Ulrich > > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
