On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:38 AM, daniel peess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi andreas,
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 09:53:22AM +0200, Andreas Kurz wrote:
>> If I understand you right, each group has to run on its own node and
>> should never run together with another group on one node .... so where
>> should a resource fail over to in case of a node failure? Isn't then
>> the cluster "overhead" obsolete without an additional standby node?
>
> if no free node is left it must not fail-over at all unless it has a higher
> priority than one of the other active resources.
> this was just an example, it still affects those other resources even if
> you have a dozen of free nodes left.

Ok .. I see. Try to set the 'default-resource-stickiness' to a
positive value and give each of your groups a different 'priority'.
That should do the trick.

Regards,
Andreas

>
> btw., sles10 sp2 and hb 2.1.3.
>
> bye,
> daniel
>
> --
> It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most 
> intelligent,
> but rather the one most responsive to change. Charles Darwin.
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to