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"><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><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 =
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=
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=
--_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"= 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">I want a way to force on= ly to use hostA as a proxy for power commands.<br></blockquote></blockquote= 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"= 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= 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_--