Minor correction to the reply On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Andrew Beekhof <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/12/22 <[email protected]>: >> Hi, >> >> We constituted the complicated cluster of three nodes.(2ACT+1STB) >> >> We built a cluster by the next combination. >> >> * corosync-1.1.2 >> * Reusable-Cluster-Components-fa44a169d55f >> * Cluster-Resource-Agents-6f02f8ad7fd4 >> * Pacemaker-1-0-d990c453b999 >> >> The resource of group02-1 hoped that it started in an active node.(srv01) >> But, against rsc_location which I appointed, the resource is started in a >> standby node.(srv03) >> >> ------ output crm_mon ------------------------- >> Resource Group: UMgroup01 >> UmDummy01 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy01): Started srv01 >> UmDummy02 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv01 >> UmIPaddr (ocf::heartbeat:IPaddr): Started srv01 >> Resource Group: group02-1 >> Dummy01-1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv03 >> Dummy01-2 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv03 >> Resource Group: group02-2 >> Dummy02-1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv02 >> Dummy02-2 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv02 >> Resource Group: grpStonith1 >> prmStonithN1-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv03 >> Resource Group: grpStonith2 >> prmStonithN2-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 >> Resource Group: grpStonith3 >> prmStonithN3-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02 >> Clone Set: clnUMgroup01 >> Started: [ srv01 srv03 ] >> Clone Set: clnPingd >> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] >> Clone Set: clnPingd2 >> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] >> ---------------------------------------------------- >> >> ------ cib.xml group02-1 rsc_location -------------- >> <rsc_location id="grp02-1-1-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv01" >> score="200"/> >> <rsc_location id="grp02-1-2-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv03" >> score="100"/> >> <rsc_location id="grp02-1-3-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv02" >> score="-INFINITY"/> >> ---------------------------------------------------- >> >> Will my cib.xml be a mistake? >> Or will it be a bug? > > Your location constraints are working (run ptest on pe-input-4.bz2 and > you'll see that we originally intend to start the group on srv01). > > The problem is that their preference is being saturated by these two > colocation constraints: > <rsc_colocation id="rsc_colocation02-1-1" rsc="group02-1" > with-rsc="clnPingd" score="INFINITY"/> > <rsc_colocation id="rsc_colocation02-1-2" rsc="group02-1" > with-rsc="clnPingd2" score="INFINITY"/> > > Run ptest -s with pe-input-4.bz2 and you'll see the scores for
Sorry, that should have been pe-input-5.bz2 > Dummy01-1 are now: > native_color: Dummy01-1 allocation score on srv01: 1000000 > native_color: Dummy01-1 allocation score on srv02: -1000000 > native_color: Dummy01-1 allocation score on srv03: 1000000 > > In the PE, 1000000 == INFINITY > > You would be better off with a constraint like example 9.3 which will > exclude any unconnected node and leave the previous location scores > unchanged: > > > http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/ch09s03s03s02.html#id2079508 > _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list [email protected] http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
