02.10.2018 23:49, Ken Gaillot пишет: ... >>>> >>>> Is a configuration like this possible? Without creating two >>>> primitives for 'ocf:esos:scst' and ditching the clone rule? Or is >>>> the >>> >>> No, there's no way to constrain against a particular clone >>> instance. >> >> Hmm ... >> >> commit 6ebb25aaa749903b77ad810c8b100745bb3f2a5f >> Author: Andrew Beekhof <[email protected]> >> Date: Fri Apr 30 15:01:25 2010 +0200 >> >> Medium: PE: Bug lf#2169 - Allow constraints to apply to specific >> instances of clones (regression tests) >> >> It does not appear to be documented anywhere and I am not even sure >> whether it is enabled by default, but code appears to be there. > > Ah, I remember now running across that when pulling out old code from > 2.0. > > It's in the testing-ground "pacemaker-next" schema, so someone would > have to mess with the validate-with property explicitly to try it. I > doubt it would work reliably with the current clone code. The > originally proposed use case was colocating different IPs with > different clone instances. >
I guess it can be used for every resource agent that supports globally-unique option as long as we have some way to associate specific function with specific instance. But unless this can be done in semi-automated way like IPaddr2 it is probably easier to simply create individual primitives instead. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
