On 27/11/18 14:35 +0100, Jan Pokorný wrote: > On 27/11/18 12:29 +0200, Klecho wrote: >> Big thanks for the answer, but I in your ways around I don't see a solution >> for the following simple case: >> >> I have a few VMs (VirtualDomain RA) and just want and to stop a few of them, >> not all. >> >> While the first VM is shutting down (target-role=stopped), it starts some >> slow update, which could take hours (because of the possible update case, >> stop timeout is very big). >> >> During these hours of update, no other VM can be stopped at all. >> >> If this isn't avoidable, this could be a quite big flaw, because it blocks >> basic functionality. > > It looks like having transition "leaves", i.e. particular executive > manipulations like stop/start operations, last in order of tens of > minutes and longer is not what's pacemaker design had in mind, > as opposed ot pushing asychronicity to the extreme (at the cost > of complexity of the "orthogonality/non-interference tests", > I think).
Also note that, moreover, extended periods of time in the context of executing particular OCF/LSB resource operations can result in relatively serious troubles under some failure scenarios unless the agents are written in a self-defensive manner (and carefully tested in practice): https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2019-January/016045.html -- Nazdar, Jan (Poki)
pgpE_tmqRGt0b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
