Mailing List Archive: Linux-HA: Users

Resource set question

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

gawith at gmx

Jul 10, 2009, 3:38 AM

Post #1 of 9 (752 views)
Permalink

Resource set question

Hi guys!

In my cluster setup, I have 6 IP addresses which should be started in
parallel for speed purpose, and two apps, depending on the six addresses.

What would be the best way to configure this?
Putting all IPs in a group will start them one after another. Bad.
A colocation with a set including the IPs (sequential=false) and the
two apps will not migrate the apps (and the remaining IPs), if one IP
should fail...

I'm happy about every proposal.

Regards

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

dk at in-telegence

Jul 10, 2009, 3:46 AM

Post #2 of 9 (705 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

Steinhauer Juergen wrote:
> Hi guys!
>
> In my cluster setup, I have 6 IP addresses which should be started in
> parallel for speed purpose, and two apps, depending on the six addresses.
>
> What would be the best way to configure this?
> Putting all IPs in a group will start them one after another. Bad.

Set ordered=false for the ip group. That will start them in parallel. I
think. Then specify a resource order constraint to start your app group
after the ip group and a colocation constraint to have the apps on the
same node as the ips.

Regards
Dominik

> A colocation with a set including the IPs (sequential=false) and the
> two apps will not migrate the apps (and the remaining IPs), if one IP
> should fail...
>
> I'm happy about every proposal.
>
> Regards
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> Linux-HA [at] lists
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

gawith at gmx

Jul 10, 2009, 3:53 AM

Post #3 of 9 (716 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

Hi Dominik,

> Set ordered=false for the ip group. That will start them in parallel. I
> think. Then specify a resource order constraint to start your app group
> after the ip group and a colocation constraint to have the apps on the
> same node as the ips.
>

As far as I know, setting "ordered=false" is not supported any more for
groups. Andrew?

Cheers
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

lmb at suse

Jul 10, 2009, 6:13 AM

Post #4 of 9 (714 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

On 2009-07-10T12:53:53, Gawith <gawith [at] gmx> wrote:

> > Set ordered=false for the ip group. That will start them in parallel. I
> > think. Then specify a resource order constraint to start your app group
> > after the ip group and a colocation constraint to have the apps on the
> > same node as the ips.
> As far as I know, setting "ordered=false" is not supported any more for
> groups. Andrew?

I'm pretty sure it still is supported.

Of course you can also use a resource set to the same effect, but
disabling ordering on groups should also do it.

Regards,
Lars

--
SuSE Labs, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

gawith at gmx

Jul 13, 2009, 1:05 AM

Post #5 of 9 (680 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

Hi,

I just tried to create a group with ordered="false" in pacemaker 1.0.4,
but this fails.

Regards

Lars Marowsky-Bree schrieb:
> On 2009-07-10T12:53:53, Gawith <gawith [at] gmx> wrote:
>
>>> Set ordered=false for the ip group. That will start them in parallel. I
>>> think. Then specify a resource order constraint to start your app group
>>> after the ip group and a colocation constraint to have the apps on the
>>> same node as the ips.
>> As far as I know, setting "ordered=false" is not supported any more for
>> groups. Andrew?
>
> I'm pretty sure it still is supported.
>
> Of course you can also use a resource set to the same effect, but
> disabling ordering on groups should also do it.
>
>
> Regards,
> Lars
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

misch at multinet

Jul 13, 2009, 1:17 AM

Post #6 of 9 (678 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

Am Montag, 13. Juli 2009 10:05:13 schrieb Steinhauer Juergen:
> Hi,
>
> I just tried to create a group with ordered="false" in pacemaker 1.0.4,
> but this fails.
>
> Regards

Why does it fail? Any eror message? Nothing in the logs?

<group id="group">
<meta_attributes id="group-meta_attributes">
<nvpair id="group-meta_attributes-ordered" name="ordered"
value="false"/>
</meta_attributes>
<primitive class="ocf" id="res1" provider="pacemaker" type="Dummy">
</primitive>
<primitive class="ocf" id="res2" provider="pacemaker" type="Dummy">
</primitive>
</group>

works for me.

--
Dr. Michael Schwartzkopff
MultiNET Services GmbH
Addresse: Bretonischer Ring 7; 85630 Grasbrunn; Germany
Tel: +49 - 89 - 45 69 11 0
Fax: +49 - 89 - 45 69 11 21
mob: +49 - 174 - 343 28 75

mail: misch [at] multinet
web: www.multinet.de

Sitz der Gesellschaft: 85630 Grasbrunn
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München HRB 114375
Geschäftsführer: Günter Jurgeneit, Hubert Martens

---

PGP Fingerprint: F919 3919 FF12 ED5A 2801 DEA6 AA77 57A4 EDD8 979B
Skype: misch42
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

gawith at gmx

Jul 13, 2009, 2:29 AM

Post #7 of 9 (677 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

Hi,

it was my fault. I didn't set "ordered" as meta-attribute.
Nevertheless, the wanted behaviour is still not achieved.

I created a colocation like this:

<resource_set id="app_colocation-resource_set" score="INFINITY"
sequential="true">
<resource_ref id="app_ips"/>
<resource_ref id="app"/>
</resource_set>

I would expect, that app_ips, the unordered group, will start in
parallel. After that, the app is started.
But I see, that the IPs start in parallel and during that also the app
is started.

Where#s my fault?

Regards.

Michael Schwartzkopff schrieb:
> Am Montag, 13. Juli 2009 10:05:13 schrieb Steinhauer Juergen:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just tried to create a group with ordered="false" in pacemaker 1.0.4,
>> but this fails.
>>
>> Regards
>
> Why does it fail? Any eror message? Nothing in the logs?
>
> <group id="group">
> <meta_attributes id="group-meta_attributes">
> <nvpair id="group-meta_attributes-ordered" name="ordered"
> value="false"/>
> </meta_attributes>
> <primitive class="ocf" id="res1" provider="pacemaker" type="Dummy">
> </primitive>
> <primitive class="ocf" id="res2" provider="pacemaker" type="Dummy">
> </primitive>
> </group>
>
> works for me.
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

andrew at beekhof

Jul 13, 2009, 6:47 AM

Post #8 of 9 (683 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Gawith<gawith [at] gmx> wrote:
> Hi Dominik,
>
>> Set ordered=false for the ip group. That will start them in parallel. I
>> think. Then specify a resource order constraint to start your app group
>> after the ip group and a colocation constraint to have the apps on the
>> same node as the ips.
>>
>
> As far as I know, setting "ordered=false" is not supported any more for
> groups. Andrew?

Thats my recollection/intention
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

andrew at beekhof

Jul 13, 2009, 6:56 AM

Post #9 of 9 (678 views)
Permalink

Re: Resource set question [In reply to]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Steinhauer Juergen<gawith [at] gmx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it was my fault. I didn't set "ordered" as meta-attribute.
> Nevertheless, the wanted behaviour is still not achieved.
>
> I created a colocation like this:
>
> <resource_set id="app_colocation-resource_set" score="INFINITY"
> sequential="true">
> <resource_ref id="app_ips"/>
> <resource_ref id="app"/>
> </resource_set>
>
> I would expect, that app_ips, the unordered group, will start in
> parallel. After that, the app is started.
> But I see, that the IPs start in parallel and during that also the app
> is started.
>
> Where#s my fault?

no idea, you'll need to create a hb_report archive for us to look at
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA [at] lists
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads