Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Linux-HA: Users

Antw: Q: Usefulness of "reload" action

 

 

Linux-HA users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


Ulrich.Windl at rz

Dec 12, 2011, 2:33 AM

Post #1 of 4 (282 views)
Permalink
Antw: Q: Usefulness of "reload" action

Hi!

As nobody answered (FAIR), I'm replying to my own message: As it turned out, there's a comment somewhere in the LRM sources that states "this part isn't implemented yet".

Once it is implemented (maybe even before), the CRM shell could benefit from a "crm resource reload .." (currently there's only a "restart" available).

Regards,
Ulrich


>>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 02.12.2011 um 10:17 in Nachricht <4ED89791.99F : 161 :
60728>:
> Hi!
>
> After the preceeding discussion about the "reload" action I added a "reload"
> to my RA.
> Now I have another problem: Assume the configuration
>
> group G A B
>
> Both A, and B are the same RA that support reload. If I change the
> configuration of A, CRM stops B first, the reloads A, then starts B again.
>
> This makes me wonder what the reasoning for "reload" is at all. In normal
> cases, a reload avoids a restart of a resource. So if A isn't restartet, why
> is B then?
>
> I was hoping: if A can be reloaded, B can stay up.
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>




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


dejanmm at fastmail

Dec 13, 2011, 8:02 AM

Post #2 of 4 (271 views)
Permalink
Re: Antw: Q: Usefulness of "reload" action [In reply to]

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:33:27AM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As nobody answered (FAIR), I'm replying to my own message: As it turned out, there's a comment somewhere in the LRM sources that states "this part isn't implemented yet".

Where?

> Once it is implemented (maybe even before), the CRM shell could benefit from a "crm resource reload .." (currently there's only a "restart" available).

Hmm, not sure what does LRM has to do with the reload. It's just
another operation.

Thanks,

Dejan

> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>
> >>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 02.12.2011 um 10:17 in Nachricht <4ED89791.99F : 161 :
> 60728>:
> > Hi!
> >
> > After the preceeding discussion about the "reload" action I added a "reload"
> > to my RA.
> > Now I have another problem: Assume the configuration
> >
> > group G A B
> >
> > Both A, and B are the same RA that support reload. If I change the
> > configuration of A, CRM stops B first, the reloads A, then starts B again.
> >
> > This makes me wonder what the reasoning for "reload" is at all. In normal
> > cases, a reload avoids a restart of a resource. So if A isn't restartet, why
> > is B then?
> >
> > I was hoping: if A can be reloaded, B can stay up.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ulrich
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


Ulrich.Windl at rz

Dec 13, 2011, 11:28 PM

Post #3 of 4 (265 views)
Permalink
Re: Antw: Q: Usefulness of "reload" action [In reply to]

>>> Dejan Muhamedagic <dejanmm [at] fastmail> schrieb am 13.12.2011 um 17:02 in
Nachricht <20111213160251.GF3568 [at] squi>:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:33:27AM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > As nobody answered (FAIR), I'm replying to my own message: As it turned
> out, there's a comment somewhere in the LRM sources that states "this part
> isn't implemented yet".
>
> Where?

pengine/allocate.c:306-328 (I guess)

>
> > Once it is implemented (maybe even before), the CRM shell could benefit
> from a "crm resource reload .." (currently there's only a "restart"
> available).
>
> Hmm, not sure what does LRM has to do with the reload. It's just
> another operation.

Jes, "another" operation probably means "not the same as restart". As said earlier,

when reloading one resource, a dependent resource is restarted, even if it can be reloaded. Meaning: A "reload" means the resource is still up during reload, thus no restarts or reloads of dependent resources should be necessary. Things like that.

Regards,
Ulrich



>
> Thanks,
>
> Dejan
>
> > Regards,
> > Ulrich
> >
> >
> > >>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 02.12.2011 um 10:17 in Nachricht <4ED89791.99F :
> 161 :
> > 60728>:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > After the preceeding discussion about the "reload" action I added a
> "reload"
> > > to my RA.
> > > Now I have another problem: Assume the configuration
> > >
> > > group G A B
> > >
> > > Both A, and B are the same RA that support reload. If I change the
> > > configuration of A, CRM stops B first, the reloads A, then starts B again.
> > >
> > > This makes me wonder what the reasoning for "reload" is at all. In normal
> > > cases, a reload avoids a restart of a resource. So if A isn't restartet,
> why
> > > is B then?
> > >
> > > I was hoping: if A can be reloaded, B can stay up.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ulrich
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>




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


dejanmm at fastmail

Dec 14, 2011, 9:27 AM

Post #4 of 4 (263 views)
Permalink
Re: Antw: Q: Usefulness of "reload" action [In reply to]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 08:28:24AM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> >>> Dejan Muhamedagic <dejanmm [at] fastmail> schrieb am 13.12.2011 um 17:02 in
> Nachricht <20111213160251.GF3568 [at] squi>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:33:27AM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > As nobody answered (FAIR), I'm replying to my own message: As it turned
> > out, there's a comment somewhere in the LRM sources that states "this part
> > isn't implemented yet".
> >
> > Where?
>
> pengine/allocate.c:306-328 (I guess)

OK. That's not LRM, but CRM/PE.

Thanks,

Dejan

> > > Once it is implemented (maybe even before), the CRM shell could benefit
> > from a "crm resource reload .." (currently there's only a "restart"
> > available).
> >
> > Hmm, not sure what does LRM has to do with the reload. It's just
> > another operation.
>
> Jes, "another" operation probably means "not the same as restart". As said earlier,
>
> when reloading one resource, a dependent resource is restarted, even if it can be reloaded. Meaning: A "reload" means the resource is still up during reload, thus no restarts or reloads of dependent resources should be necessary. Things like that.
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dejan
> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ulrich
> > >
> > >
> > > >>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 02.12.2011 um 10:17 in Nachricht <4ED89791.99F :
> > 161 :
> > > 60728>:
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > After the preceeding discussion about the "reload" action I added a
> > "reload"
> > > > to my RA.
> > > > Now I have another problem: Assume the configuration
> > > >
> > > > group G A B
> > > >
> > > > Both A, and B are the same RA that support reload. If I change the
> > > > configuration of A, CRM stops B first, the reloads A, then starts B again.
> > > >
> > > > This makes me wonder what the reasoning for "reload" is at all. In normal
> > > > cases, a reload avoids a restart of a resource. So if A isn't restartet,
> > why
> > > > is B then?
> > > >
> > > > I was hoping: if A can be reloaded, B can stay up.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Ulrich
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Linux-HA users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.