Open Stack

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Sofer Athlan-Guyot wrote:
> > Can I change the interface of pcmk_resource?
> >
> > You have pcmk_constraint but I have pcmk_location/colocation/order
> > separately. I can merge then into a single resource like you did
> > or I can keep them separated. Or I can make both. Actually they are
> > different enough to be separated.
> 
> Yes, I think that you've got it right, and separating the resource seems
> to be cleaner.

Agreed. The resources have fairly different semantics that keeping them
separate makes more sense. E.g. the following pattern cannot be
expressed cleanly today with the openstack puppet-pacemaker module (at least a
couple of months ago, haven't looked recently):
pcs constraint location foores rule resource-discovery=exclusive score=0 nodetag eq foonode

Not sure if the above would work with the fuel module.

> > Will I have to develop 'pcs' style provider for every resource? Do we
> > really need them?
> 
> 'pcs' command is the way to go on rhel platform.  It's the interface of
> choice to the pacemaker interface.  So, I would say yes.  I can help
> here.

Also note that pcs did make it to debian unstable a few months ago, so
in the mid-long term, this interface will be relevant for Debian-derived
distros as well.

cheers,
Michele
-- 
Michele Baldessari            <michele at acksyn.org>
C2A5 9DA3 9961 4FFB E01B  D0BC DDD4 DCCB 7515 5C6D