On 24/04/2013, at 8:49 PM, Ulrich Windl <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi! > > I remember a complaint from my side that colocation should be symmetrical. Unfortunately many things are much easier to ask for than to implement. > I > guess you'll find the responses via Google. Maybe the other effects can be > derived from the asymmetry... > > Regards, > Ulrich > >>>> Moullé Alain<[email protected]> schrieb am 24.04.2013 um 11:41 in > Nachricht > <[email protected]>: >> Hi, >> >> a behavior which is not clear for me : >> >> 1/ Let's say we have 2 nodes node1 & node2 in the HA cluster, and 3 >> Dummy resources : resname1, resname2, resname3 >> and the forbidden colocation set like this : >> >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname1-resname2 -inf: resname1 resname2 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname1-resname3 -inf: resname3 resname1 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname2-resname1 -inf: resname2 resname1 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname2-resname3 -inf: resname3 resname2 >> >> In this case, if resname1 is started on node1 and resname2 is started on >> node2, >> if we ask to start resname3, it does not start, and that 's seems >> correct for me >> because of both -inf: resname3 resname1 and -inf: resname3 resname2 >> >> Now, if the forbidden colocation are set like this : >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname1-resname2 -inf: resname1 resname2 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname1-resname3 -inf: resname1 resname3 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname2-resname1 -inf: resname2 resname1 >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname2-resname3 -inf: resname2 resname3 >> In this case, if resname1 is started on node1 and resname2 is started on >> node2, >> if we ask to start resname3, it does at first stop resname1, then >> migrate resname2 on node1, and finally start resname3 on node2 >> >> 2/ Another try with two Dummy resources resname1, resname2 and the >> forbidden colocation set like this : >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname1-resname2 -inf: resname1 resname2 >> >> If we ask to migrate resname2 to node1 , resname2 is stopped, resname1 >> is migrated to node2, and finally resname2 is started on node1. >> >> Now, the same test but with the forbidden colocation set like this : >> colocation forbidden-coloc-resname2-resname1 -inf: resname2 resname1 >> >> If we ask to migrate resname2 to node1 , nothing happens, resname1 >> remains on node1 and resname2 on node2 >> >> >> So, this seems to mean that the order of the resources for a -inf: >> collocation is important and has an impact on the behavior. >> >> I wonder if it is a normal behavior ? and so we have to really take in >> account the order on -inf colocation constraints ? >> >> or if there is a bug around this? >> >> Thanks >> Alain >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
