[Pacemaker] Problem when relating it to colocation under placement-strategy environment

Andrew Beekhof andrew at beekhof.net
Thu Jul 14 22:55:09 EDT 2011

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Gao,Yan <ygao at novell.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Sorry for the delay. I've been thinking about it...
> On 07/14/11 12:21, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> This loop looks wrong
>> +         for(gIter2 = resource1->rsc_cons; gIter2 != NULL; gIter2 = gIter2->next) {
>> You're very dependant on the number and order of constraints because
>> of the way resource1_weight is being updated.
>> AFAICS, this only works if there is a single non INFINITY constraint.
> Indeed. We can hardly tell what exactly the resources' scores are before
> allocating resources. The scores would be merged/updated during
> allocating. That means that we can hardly tell what the best allocating
> order is before allocating resources. What "sort_rsc_process_order()"
> does is just to predict a relatively ideal order.
>> I'll take a look at the before and after results tomorrow and see if
>> there might be a better way to achieve the same results.
> That would be great. Thanks!

Is there a bug I can reference in the commit message?
Can someone file one if not?

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list