-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Booth package-wise modularizing (discussion) #25
Comments
Actually, |
There are only two roles, site and arbitrator. As you noted, both
are provided by a single binary. Not only that, but also booth
client is implemented within the same binary.
I guess that it would be possible to split it into several
packages. However, I'm not sure what would be the benefit to
justify the effort.
|
On 07/04/16 03:36 -0700, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
Primary intention: By-product advantages:
Actually my current line of thinking, in Fedora context, is to This way, installing booth (as well as booth-site that will actually For non-Fedora, it could be the same, plus either booth-site or Of course, Fedora packaging can diverge from upstream, but at Jan (Poki) |
On 07/04/16 16:09 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
...leading to another one:
This seems to be a big win, actually. Jan (Poki) |
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 07:09:17AM -0700, Jan Pokorný wrote:
Heh, such admins should stay away from HA. If we're on to
Right. Though introducing resource-agents may lead to circular
Definitely. I'm also all for improvement.
Unfortunately, this won't be that trivial, the arbitrator |
On 12/04/16 09:04 -0700, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
Can you be more specific about such a cycle please?
The dependency is on pacemaker-cli for run-time (not runtime of the
This is what the new packaging order would achieve. My version in the works now uses Jan (Poki) |
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 01:32:25PM -0700, Jan Pokorný wrote:
Nevermind, the direction I had in mind was wrong.
Yeah, we need to make sure that booth never tries to invoke
But one thing I'm missing: if booth-core depends on pacemaker-cli |
On 18/04/16 07:43 -0700, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
The imposed loop breaking is why I deliberately made booth-core (Rhyme time: if you are to install just booth-core, And just booth could then be an empty envelop package/Provides Jan (Poki) |
For how I eventually split What might be doable to ensure full compatibility with old-style Note also the |
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 11:57:52AM -0700, Jan Pokorný wrote:
No, but I'd be more inclined to have 1.1 as the next version. |
The split looks interesting, and is certainly beneficial, but I'm
still not entirely convinced whether the introduced complexity
and multiple packages are worth it.
IIRC, the positive side is not to enforce installing pacemaker &
co on the arbitrator. I'm all for installing less software when
not necessary, but increasingly have an impression that that view
is not universally shared. People consider disk space cheap and
apparently don't care how much of it gets used. Ditto for
resources spent (wasted) on upgrades, etc.
Is multiple packages better than just one? That seems to me to
be a question verging on philosophical. I'm also not sure about
how people actually operating data centres consider that, and if
at all they do.
|
Hello @dmuhamedagic at al.,
it occurs to me that it's an overhead to have booth package serve
all possible roles incl. arbitrator.
I envision that arbitrator specifically could be split to a package
on it's own (
booth-arbitrator
containing the initscript/systemd unitsand its config file).
However, as it uses the same binary as a proper booth package, more
packaging surgery would be needed. So one of the possible lines of
splitting could be that the OCF agent stuff is in a dedicated
booth-agent
package.Plain
booth
would remain the core carrying the binary,booth-keygen, doc and license files etc., and would be required
by both
booth-arbitrator
andbooth-agent
.It's a half-baked idea, only to see if it's viable.
If positive, also a safe mechanism for upgrade/downgrade path would
have to be ensured (via Obsoletes, etc.).
Suggestions/objections?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: