[Pacemaker] RFC: Compacting constraints

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 06:15:34PM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2009-10-30T15:28:00, Dejan Muhamedagic <dejanmm at fastmail.fm> wrote:
> 
> > > > BTW, I guess that there are other CIB phrases which are commonly in
> > > > use.
> > > Right, but I think the "order A after B; collocation B with A" is likely
> > > the most common expression; we've got to start somewhere ;-)
> > Groups :) It's just that ms resources can't belong to a group.
> 
> Groups aren't powerful enough for a variety of reasons.
> 
> Resources can only be part of one group, for example.  And
> ordering/collocating an unordered/uncollocated group with a clone also
> doesn't work. 
> 
> My educated guess is that this is because groups were meant to handle
> simple things, and abusing them for something complex doesn't work out
> well ;-)

OK, OK, it was just that it reminded me of groups. Though having
a pattern which repeats must indicate that there is a concept
which may be named behind it. Now, if you find a single-word
name, which would be easily recognized by the rest of HA
population...

Thanks,

Dejan

> 
> 
> Regards,
>     Lars
> 
> -- 
> Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
> "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list
> Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker