[ClusterLabs] Possible idea for 2.0.0: renaming the Pacemaker daemons
kgaillot at redhat.com
Tue Apr 3 17:35:18 EDT 2018
On Tue, 2018-04-03 at 08:33 +0200, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote:
> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> writes:
> > > I
> > > would vote against PREFIX-configd as compared to other cluster
> > > software,
> > > I would expect that daemon name to refer to a more generic
> > > cluster
> > > configuration key/value store, and that is something that I have
> > > some
> > > hope of adding in the future ;) So I'd like to keep "config" or
> > > "database" for such a possible future component...
> > What's the benefit of another layer over the CIB?
> The idea is to provide a more generalized key-value store that other
> applications built on top of pacemaker can use. Something like a
> HTTP REST API to a key-value store with transactional semantics
> by the cluster. My understanding so far is that the CIB is too heavy
> support that kind of functionality well, and besides that the
> is not convenient for non-cluster applications.
My first impression is that it sounds like a good extension to attrd,
cluster-wide attributes instead of node attributes. (I would envision a
REST API daemon sitting in front of all the daemons without providing
any actual functionality itself.)
The advantage to extending attrd is that it already has code to
synchronize attributes at start-up, DC election, partition healing,
etc., as well as features such as write dampening.
Also cib -> pcmk-configd is very popular :)
> My most immediate applications for that would be to build file
> into the cluster and to avoid having to have an extra communication
> layer for the UI.
How would file syncing via a key-value store work?
One of the key hurdles in any cluster-based sync is
authentication/authorization. Authorization to use a cluster UI is not
necessarily equivalent to authorization to transfer arbitrary files as
Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com>
More information about the Users