[Pacemaker] Enable remote monitoring

[Gao,Yan]

On 12/04/12 18:21, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2012-12-04T12:45:05, "Gao,Yan" <ygao at suse.com> wrote:
> 
>>> (Ohhh. Did we just find a use for a negative score here? ;-) Just
>>> throwing that out there. It'd fit the model we have so far, is all I'm
>>> saying.)
>> Perhaps to name another "kind" for order constraint instead of an
>> additional optional attribute?
> 
> Sounds good. But - may this be something that we'd perhaps want to
> combine with Mandatory/Optional?
Perhaps, making it an additional attribute would definitely provide more
combinations for users.

> 
>> If "group" has already been tortured enough, like Andrew said :-) , then
>> we don't have to use group in either way.  If we really need some kind
>> of "container", how about we just use resource_set:
>>
>> order vm-then-rscs inf: vm (nagios-foo nagios-bar) \
>>       restart-origin="true"
>> colocation rscs-with-vm inf: (nagios-foo nagios-bar) vm
> 
> Yes, this also looks like a good idea.
> 
> (While we're at it, it'd be awesome if there was a constraint that
> combined order + colocation.)
Sounds good. Or we can just leave it to CLIs/GUIs to decide how to pack
them :-)

> 
>> <rsc_order id="vm-with-rscs" restart-origin="true">
>>   <resource_set id="vm-origin">
>>     <resource_ref id="vm"/>
>>   </resource_set>
>>   <resource_set id="vm-rscs" sequential="false" >
>>     <resource_ref id="nagios-foo"/>
>>     <resource_ref id="nagios-bar"/>
>>   </resource_set>
>> </rsc_order>
> 
> Yes, I think this looks good.
The patch to the schema I proposed supports this already ;-)

Regards,
  Gao,Yan
-- 
Gao,Yan <ygao at suse.com>
Software Engineer
China Server Team, SUSE.