On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Brice Figureau<brice-pup...@daysofwonder.com> wrote: > On 17/08/09 14:22, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Brice >> Figureau<brice...@daysofwonder.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 14:00 +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Brice >>>> Figureau<brice...@daysofwonder.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I was wondering if colocating with a clone would work, >>>> >>>> That allows the resource to keep running as long as at least one node >>>> has a copy of the clone running. >>>> Not sure if that helps in your scenario >>> >>> Are you sure? >> >> very > > Indeed this helps. What I'm not sure and can't find a definite answer about > is if the current clone resource running on the same node as the vip > (colocated with the clone) fails (ie it reaches migration-threshold), then > this colocated resource will move in another place where another member of > said clone still runs.
Naturally :-) If the instance fails it will be stopped and the colocation constraint will ensure the VIP is moved. > > That, and my other question (in another thread here) about setting a score > << inf or >> -inf for colocated resource doesn't seem to work as advertised > (or I didn't understand it, which is well possible :-)). What was the actual vs. expected behavior? _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
