Hi Sergey! Comments inline.
On 11/20/2014 05:25 AM, Sergey Vasilenko wrote:
Nor should it, IMO. Other than the Neutron dhcp-agent, all OpenStack
services that run on a "controller node" are completely stateless.
Therefore, I don't see any reason to use corosync/pacemaker for
mana
>
> Nor should it, IMO. Other than the Neutron dhcp-agent, all OpenStack
> services that run on a "controller node" are completely stateless.
> Therefore, I don't see any reason to use corosync/pacemaker for management
> of these resources.
I see following reasons for managing neutron agents by P
> On 20 Nov 2014, at 6:55 am, Sergii Golovatiuk
> wrote:
>
> Hi crew,
>
> Please see my inline comments.
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was reading the blueprints mentioned here and thought I'd take the
> opportunity to introduce myself and ask a few questions.
> For those that don't recognise my n
On 11/18/2014 07:25 PM, Andrew Woodward wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
* Openstack services are not managed by Pacemaker
Oh?
fuel doesn't (currently) set up API services in pacemaker
Nor should it, IMO. Other than the Neutron dhcp-agent, all OpenStack
serv
Hi crew,
Please see my inline comments.
Hi Everyone,
>
> I was reading the blueprints mentioned here and thought I'd take the
> opportunity to introduce myself and ask a few questions.
> For those that don't recognise my name, Pacemaker is my baby - so I take a
> keen interest helping people have
Hi everyone
Actually, we changed a lot in 5.1 HA and there are some changes in 6.0
also. Right now we are using assymetric cluster and use location
constraints to control resources. We started using xml diffs as the most
reliable and supported approach as it does not depend on pcs/crmsh
implementa
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Aleksandr Didenko
wrote:
> HI,
>
> in order to make sure some critical Haproxy backends are running (like mysql
> or keystone) before proceeding with deployment, we use execs like [1] or
> [2].
We used to do the API waiting in the puppet resource providers
consumi
Some comments inline
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was reading the blueprints mentioned here and thought I'd take the
> opportunity to introduce myself and ask a few questions.
> For those that don't recognise my name, Pacemaker is my baby - so I tak
Hi Everyone,
I was reading the blueprints mentioned here and thought I'd take the
opportunity to introduce myself and ask a few questions.
For those that don't recognise my name, Pacemaker is my baby - so I take a keen
interest helping people have a good experience with it :)
A couple of items
+1 for ha-pacemaker-improvements
--
Best regards,
Sergii Golovatiuk,
Skype #golserge
IRC #holser
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Borodaenko <
dborodae...@mirantis.com> wrote:
> Good plan, but I really hate the name of this blueprint. I think we
> should stop lumping different unrelated
Good plan, but I really hate the name of this blueprint. I think we
should stop lumping different unrelated HA improvements into a single
blueprint with a generic name like that, especially when we already
had a blueprint with essentially the same name
(ha-pacemaker-improvements). There's nothing w
HI,
in order to make sure some critical Haproxy backends are running (like
mysql or keystone) before proceeding with deployment, we use execs like [1]
or [2].
We're currently working on a minor improvements of those execs, but there
is another approach - we can replace those execs with puppet res
12 matches
Mail list logo
