5:03 a.m.
--_000_632B7410C4884422B58DA34F9998BFDFsluse_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
30 jul 2012 kl. 11.01 skrev Itamar Heim:
On 07/30/2012 08:56 AM, Karli Sj=F6berg wrote:
28 jul 2012 kl. 14.11 skrev Moti Asayag:
On 07/26/2012 02:53 PM, Karli Sj=F6berg wrote:
Hi,
In my DC, I have three hosts added:
hostA
hostB
hostC
I want a way to force only to use hostA as a proxy for power commands.
The algorithm of selection a host to act as a proxy for PM commands is
quite naive: any host from the system with status UP.
You can see how it is being selected in FencingExecutor.FindVdsToFence()
from
ovirt-engine/backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/cor=
e/bll/FencingExecutor.java
There is no other algorithm for the selection at the moment.
How would you handle a case in which hostA isn't responsive ? Wouldn't
you prefer trying to perform the fencing using other available host ?
Let me explain a little to make you better understand my reasoning
behind this configuration.
We work with segmented, separated networks. One network for public
access, one for storage traffic, one for management and so on. That
means that if the nodes themselves have to do their own
power-management, the nodes would require three interfaces each, and the
metal we are using for hosts just don=B4t have that. But if we can use the
engine to do that, the hosts would only require two interfaces, which
most 1U servers are equipped with as standard (plus one
iLO/IPMI/whatev), so we can use them as hosts without issue. Then the
backend has one extra interface that it can use to communicate over the
power management network to the respective service processor with.
Is there a "better" way to achieve what we are aiming for? Ideally, I
would like to set up the two NICs in a bond and create VLAN-interfaces
on top of that bond. That way, I can have as many virtual interfaces as
I want without having more than two physical NICs, but I haven=B4t been
able to find a good HOWTO explaining the process.
I think there is a difference between:
1. allowing engine to fence
2. allowing to choose fencing host per cluster (or per host)
it sounds like you actually want #1, but can live with #2, by installing
the engine as a host as well.
Exactly, I can live with #2, as I have the engine added as hostA in my DC
Med V=E4nliga H=E4lsningar
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
Karli Sj=F6berg
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Box 7079 (Visiting Address Kron=E5sv=E4gen 8)
S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
Phone: +46-(0)18-67 15 66
karli.sjoberg@slu.se<mailto:karli.sjoberg@adm.slu.se>
--_000_632B7410C4884422B58DA34F9998BFDFsluse_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode:=
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;
"><br><div><div>30 jul 2012 =
kl. 11.01 skrev Itamar Heim:</div><br
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><=
blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>On 07/30/2012 08:56 AM, Karli Sj=F6berg
wrote=
:<br><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite">2=
8 jul 2012 kl. 14.11 skrev Moti Asayag:<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D=
"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"=
On 07/26/2012 02:53 PM, Karli Sj=F6berg
wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquot=
e><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"c=
ite">Hi,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite=
"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></bl=
ockquote></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><=
blockquote type=3D"cite">In my DC, I have three hosts
added:<br></blockquot=
e></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"c=
ite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><=
blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite=
">hostA<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"=
<blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite">hostB<br></blockquote>=
</blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cit=
e"><blockquote
type=3D"cite">hostC<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquot=
e><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"c=
ite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><=
blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">I want a
way to force on=
ly to use hostA as a proxy for power
commands.<br></blockquote></blockquote=
</blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><br></blo=
ckquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">Th=
e algorithm of selection a host to act as a proxy for PM commands is<br></b=
lockquote></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite">=
quite naive: any host from the system with status
UP.<br></blockquote></blo=
ckquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquot=
e></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite">You can =
see how it is being selected in FencingExecutor.FindVdsToFence()<br></block=
quote></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite">from=
<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D=
"cite">ovirt-engine/backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/eng=
ine/core/bll/FencingExecutor.java<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
=
type=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><bloc=
kquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">There is no
other algorithm =
for the selection at the
moment.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote t=
ype=3D"cite"><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><block=
quote type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">How would you
handle a case i=
n which hostA isn't responsive ?
Wouldn't<br></blockquote></blockquote><blo=
ckquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">you prefer
trying to perfor=
m the fencing using other available host
?<br></blockquote></blockquote><bl=
ockquote type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blo=
ckquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">Let me explain a little to make you
bette=
r understand my reasoning<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite">behind =
this configuration.<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockqu=
ote><blockquote type=3D"cite">We work with segmented, separated
networks. O=
ne network for public<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite">access, one=
for storage traffic, one for management and so on.
That<br></blockquote><b=
lockquote type=3D"cite">means that if the nodes themselves have to do their=
own<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite">power-management, the nodes =
would require three interfaces each, and the<br></blockquote><blockquote
ty=
pe=3D"cite">metal we are using for hosts just don=B4t have that. But if we =
can use the<br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">engine
to do that, th=
e hosts would only require two interfaces,
which<br></blockquote><blockquot=
e type=3D"cite">most 1U servers are equipped with as standard (plus
one<br>=
</blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">iLO/IPMI/whatev), so we can
use them=
as hosts without issue. Then the<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"=
backend has one extra interface that it can use to communicate over
the<br=
</blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">power management network to
the res=
pective service processor with.<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><=
br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">Is there a
"better" way to achiev=
e what we are aiming for? Ideally, I<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"ci=
te">would like to set up the two NICs in a bond and create VLAN-interfaces<=
br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">on top of that bond.
That way, I =
can have as many virtual interfaces as<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"=
cite">I want without having more than two physical NICs, but I haven=B4t be=
en<br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">able to find a
good HOWTO expl=
aining the process.<br></blockquote><blockquote
type=3D"cite"><br></blockqu=
ote><br>I think there is a difference between:<br>1. allowing engine to
fen=
ce<br>2. allowing to choose fencing host per cluster (or per
host)<br><br>i=
t sounds like you actually want #1, but can live with #2, by installing <br=
the engine as a host as
well.<br></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div>E=
xactly, I can live with #2, as I have the engine added as hostA in my DC<br=
<div>
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span"
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color:=
rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: no=
rmal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orp=
hans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizonta=
l-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorati=
ons-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-wi=
dth: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div><br
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"=
<br></div><div>Med V=E4nliga
H=E4lsningar<br>-----------------------------=
--------------------------------------------------<br>Karli
Sj=F6berg<br>Sw=
edish University of Agricultural Sciences<br>Box 7079 (Visiting Address Kro=
n=E5sv=E4gen 8)<br>S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden<br>Phone: +46-(0)18-67
15=
66</div><div><a
href=3D"mailto:karli.sjoberg@adm.slu.se">karli.sjoberg@slu=
.se</a></div></span>
</div>
<br></body></html>=
--_000_632B7410C4884422B58DA34F9998BFDFsluse_--