[Pacemaker] Last chance to object to the syntax for cluster tickets (multi-site clusters)

Florian Haas florian at hastexo.com
Fri Feb 24 03:00:05 EST 2012

On 02/24/12 02:53, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> We're about to lock in the syntax for cluster tickets (used for
> multi-ste clusters).
> The syntax rules are at:
>   https://github.com/gao-yan/pacemaker/commit/9e492f6231df2d8dd548f111a2490f02822b29ea
> And its use, along with some examples, can be found here:
>    https://github.com/gao-yan/pacemaker/commit/5f75da8d99171cc100e87935c8c3fd2f83243f93
> If there are any comments/concerns, now is the time to raise them.

For naming, I must confess I find it a bit strange that while all other
constraint types use ordinary English names ("order", "location",
"colocation"), this one uses a rather strange looking abbreviation.
However, I'll also concede that the only alternative that currently
comes to my mind would be to rename the constraint type to "ticket", but
that obviously creates ambiguity between ticket the constraint and
ticket the thing that booth manages, so it would probably be worse.
Perhaps others have a better idea.

About the documentation, I generally find it very useful; I only have
one addition for a suggestion: it's not immediately clear from the
existing docs that multiple resources can depend on the same ticket. It
does mention resource sets (which, still, could use an additional
sentence à la "thus, multiple resources can depend on the same ticket"
as a courtesy to the novice reader), but it doesn't say whether it's OK
to have multiple constraints referring to the same ticket.

If I can spare the time some time in the next few weeks I might also
prepare a "die, passive voice, die" patch for that documentation page,
but that's just a pet peeve of mine. :)


Need help with High Availability?

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list