[Pacemaker] placement-strategy=minimal - placing and logging

Lars Marowsky-Bree lmb at suse.com
Fri Mar 8 06:08:05 EST 2013

On 2013-03-08T11:59:33, Vladimir <ml at foomx.de> wrote:

> Collocations were exactly what I try to avoid. The setup is planned to
> get >15 resources (and an upper limit is not defined). I think it would
> get pretty hard to consider all possible collocations, especially if a
> kind of automated deployment is regarded. Using larger sets of
> collocation makes the configuration more difficult to read an
> especially to maintain.

I see your point. But the collocations don't really get more difficult
with the number of resources, but mostly node size.

And the way you described your setup (N nodes + 1 standby), chunking
them up accordingly isn't that difficult. Assuming identical nodes.

But yes, of course a fully automated redistribution would be

Like I said, we take patches, and I think people could be found to
convert cash to patches ;-)

> Ok, I see but I'm looking for a possibility to monitor such states to
> be informed if a resource can't be started because of lack of provided
> utilization. 
> Does anybody has an idea about that issue? 

Running the PE is the only choice right now. I think with crm_mon you'll
also be informed about stopped resources; basically you'd want to be
told about everything not explicitly stopped (e.g., target-role !=
stopped), right?

Good luck,

Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list