Hi Andrew in fact, my real problem was simplier like this one described as a simplified example of my configuration : (I'm working with pacemaker from RHEL7.1 GA (1.1.12-22) )
Let's say for the example that we have in a two-nodes configuration these 5 resources : 1 resource VGA (ocf:heartbeat:LVM) 1 resource fs-img-for-vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem) 1 resource vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain) 1 resource fs-img-for-vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem) 1 resource vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain) knowing that both fs-img are on LVs in VGA So I have to set these constraints : prefered location VGA on node1 order fs-img-vm1 after VGA order fs-img-vm2 after VGA order vm1 after fs-img-vm1 order vm2 after fs-img-vm2 colocation fs-img-vm1 with VGA colocation fs-img-vm2 with VGA colocation vm1 with fs-img-vm1 colocation vm2 with fs-img-vm2 but I unfornutately, I want that the vm2 (and fs-img-vm2) never starts on node2, said in another way : I want that if VGA is on node1 all resources fs-img-vm1, fs-img-vm2, vm1 and vm2 must be started on node1, but if VGA for whatever reason has been migrated on node2, I want that only resources VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 are started on node2, both others fs-img-vm2 and vm2 remainig "Stopped" So I add the constraint location fs-img-vm2 avoids node2 (hence +INF) But testing this configuration, none of the 5 resources can never start on vm2. In my understanding, due to my choice of setting colocation that way : fs with VGA , and vm with fs, I was thinking that pacemaker, when migrating on node2, could start VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 on node2 and leave fs-img-vm2 and vm2 "Stopped". Am I wrong ? And is there a way to get this behavior ? Thanks a lot Alain ________________________________________ De : [email protected] [[email protected]] de la part de Andrew Beekhof [[email protected]] Envoyé : vendredi 28 août 2015 04:31 À : Please subscribe to [email protected] instead Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1) > On 25 Aug 2015, at 6:18 pm, Ulrich Windl <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <[email protected]> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in > Nachricht > <df84cff8a85ab546b2d53fff12267727022...@frauvj99ex5msx.ww931.my-it-solutions.net > > : >> Hi >> >> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these > >> resources: >> >> Res1 >> Res2 >> Res3 >> Res4 >> Res5 >> >> with current colocation constraints : >> Res2 with Res1 >> Res3 with Res2 > > I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints; ? > can you > try > R2 with R1 > R3 with R1 > (and related) instead? No no no. This has the opposite effect, a failure of R3 could easily result in /none/ of the resources moving. Better to just change: >> Res4 with Res1 to: Res4 with Res3 Newer versions might do better with the existing config too. If not, attach a crm_report :) >> Res5 with Res4 >> >> and current order symmetrical constraints : >> Res2 after Res1 >> Res3 after Res2 >> >> Res4 after Res1 >> Res5 after Res4 >> >> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources . >> >> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the > >> 5 Ressources are migrated. >> >> Is there a solution ? >> >> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources : >> >> Res1=VGA >> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA > LV) >> Res3=VM1 >> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another > VGA >> LV) >> Res5=VM2 >> >> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is >> mounted and before the VM is started. >> >> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together >> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA >> stalls the migration of the VM ... >> >> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ? >> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes. >> >> Thanks >> Alain Moullé >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down. >> Please subscribe to [email protected] instead. >> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> _______________________________________________ >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list is closing down. > Please subscribe to [email protected] instead. > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list is closing down. Please subscribe to [email protected] instead. http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list is closing down. Please subscribe to [email protected] instead. http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
