On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Dan Frincu <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 3:35 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ooops, sorry, the behavior is not the same, you were true : >> with cluster-recheck-interval="90" >> crm resource migrate group1 node2 P300S >> migration is quite immediately effective >> then >> crm resource migrate group1 node1 P300S >> and quite 90s later, the migration occurs for the 3 groups. >> >> OK but, is there any problem to add this check every 90s ? >> or does it have no bad effect on the cluster in general ? > > I think it also does a probe of all resources when the recheck > interval is reached,
It shouldn't be doing this. > however it is required for time based > constraints. > > Regards, > Dan > >> >> Thanks >> Alain >> >> >> >> De : [email protected] >> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> >> Date : 20/12/2011 14:26 >> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Question or problem around migration >> Envoyé par : [email protected] >> >> >> >> Hi >> >> I tried with cluster-recheck-interval="90" added in the >> cib-bootstrap-options, then same test but behavior remains the same. >> >> Alain >> >> >> >> De : Dan Frincu <[email protected]> >> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> >> Date : 20/12/2011 12:17 >> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Question or problem around migration >> Envoyé par : [email protected] >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Thanks, but no, I wrote in my first email that the behavior was the >>> same with or without lifetime, and with a lifetime of 5mn (P300S), >>> evenif I wait more than 5mn before requesting the second migration, >>> the migration is not executed, the group3 remains stalled on node2 >>> because of first cli-prefer on group2/node2 even if lifetime has >> expired. >>> (and by the way, I have not the warning messages you mention) >>> >>> Alain >> >> Yes, well, any time based constraint is effective if you enable >> cluster-recheck-interval. >> >> Guess you need to take a look at >> http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/#s-rules-recheck >> >> >> >> Regards, >> Dan >> >>> >>> >>> >>> De : Dan Frincu <[email protected]> >>> A : General Linux-HA mailing list <[email protected]> >>> Date : 20/12/2011 11:30 >>> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Question or problem around migration >>> Envoyé par : [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I just would like how to manager the behavior described below : >>>> >>>> Let's say for the example that we have two nodes in Pacemaker >>>> configuration, and three groups >>>> of primitives group1, group2, and group3, and that we have colocation >>>> constraints such as coloc >>>> group2 with group1 , coloc group3 with group1. >>>> Now, let's say that all three groups are started on node1 >>>> >>>> Let's do the migration command : >>>> crm resource migrate group2 node2 P300S >>>> all if working fine, the 3 groups are migrated on node2 >>>> and we can see a cli-prefer in the cib.xml for group2 >>>> now if later we do the command : >>>> crm resource migrate group3 node1 P300S >>>> we can see the new cli-prefer in the cib.xml for group3 >>>> but the migration is never executed, it seems that it is >>>> the first cli-prefer on group2 that prevents the second migration to be >>>> executed. >>>> I can say that because if I so the same test but with remove of >>>> cli-prefer for group2 >>>> before executiong the crm resource migrate group3 node1 P300S, the >>>> migration >>>> of the 3 groups back to node1 is effective. >>>> Note that I also did the same test without lifetime parameter and it is >>>> the same >>>> behavior. >>>> >>>> So my question: >>>> is it an already identified (and perphas fixed) bug ? >>>> or is it a normal behavior and how should we manage this behavior so >>> that >>>> migration >>>> requests are always effective ? >>> >>> Well, after you issued the crm resource move command you might have >>> seen something similar to this: >>> >>> WARNING: Creating rsc_location constraint 'cli-standby-all' with a >>> score of -INFINITY for resource all on cluster2. >>> This will prevent all from running on cluster2 until the >>> constraint is removed using the 'crm_resource -U' command or manually >>> with cibadmin >>> This will be the case even if cluster2 is the last node in the >>> cluster >>> This message can be disabled with -Q >>> >>> Unless you specify a lifetime for the move command, then it's >>> permanent. Normally lifetime should be set to a value higher than the >>> time it takes the resources to migrate, otherwise it would remove the >>> constraint before all of the resources have been started on their >>> destination, which would cause them to migrate back, so this must be >>> tested, it depends on your specific scenario. >>> >>>> (I have the solution, in my example above, to do an crm resource >>>> unmigrate group2, >>>> just to remove the cli-prefer, before asking the second migration, >>> because >>> >>> The lifetime will help in this case. >>> >>> HTH, >>> Dan >>> >>>> I have >>>> stickyness values which avoids the group2 to move in this case, but is >>> it >>>> the >>>> only way and correct way to manage this behavior ?) >>>> >>>> Thanks for piece of advice. >>>> Alain >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Linux-HA mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >>>> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dan Frincu >>> CCNA, RHCE >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> Dan Frincu >> CCNA, RHCE >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > > > > -- > Dan Frincu > CCNA, RHCE > _______________________________________________ > 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
