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

Gao,Yan ygao at novell.com
Fri Jul 15 01:16:31 EDT 2011

On 07/15/11 10:55, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> 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?

Gao,Yan <ygao at suse.com>
Software Engineer
China Server Team, SUSE.

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list