[ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Order set troubles

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> schrieb am 24.03.2021 um 18:56 in
Nachricht
<5bffded9c6e614919981dcc7d0b2903220bae19d.camel at redhat.com>:
> On Wed, 2021‑03‑24 at 09:27 +0000, Strahil Nikolov wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>  
>> I have a trouble creating an order set .
>> The end goal is to create a 2 node cluster where nodeA will mount
>> nfsA , while nodeB will mount nfsB.On top of that a depended cloned
>> resource should start on the node only if nfsA or nfsB has started
>> locally.

This looks like ad odd design to me, and I wonder: What is the use case?
(We are using "NFS loop-mounts" for many years, where the cluster needs the
NFS service it provides, but that's a different design)

Regards,
Ulrich


>>  
>> A prototype code would be something like:
>> pcs constraint order start (nfsA or nfsB) then start resource‑clone
>>  
>> I tried to create a set like this, but it works only on nodeB:
>> pcs constraint order set nfsA nfsB resource‑clone
>> 
>> Any idea how to implement that order constraint ?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Strahil Nikolov
> 
> Basically you want two sets, one with nfsA and nfsB with no ordering
> between them, and a second set with just resource‑clone, ordered after
> the first set.
> 
> I believe the pcs syntax is:
> 
> pcs constraint order set nfsA nfsB sequential=false require‑all=false
> set resource‑clone
> 
> sequential=false says nfsA and nfsB have no ordering between them, and
> require‑all=false says that resource‑clone only needs one of them.
> 
> (I don't remember for sure the order of the sets in the command, i.e.
> whether it's the primary set first or the dependent set first, but I
> think that's right.)
> ‑‑ 
> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users 
> 
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/