On Jun 15, 2010, at 6:14 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:57:47AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Andreas Kurz <andreas.k...@linbit.com> >> wrote: >>> On Tuesday 15 June 2010 08:40:58 Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Vadym Chepkov <vchep...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote: >>>>>> I filed bug 2435, glad to hear "it's not me" >>>>> >>>>> Andrew closed this bug >>>>> (http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2435) as >>>>> resolved, but I respectfully disagree. >>>>> >>>>> I will try to explain a problem again in this list. >>>>> >>>>> lets assume you want to have several resources running on the same node. >>>>> They are independent, so if one is going down, others shouldn't be >>>>> stopped. You would do this by using a resource set, like this: >>>>> >>>>> primitive dummy1 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy >>>>> primitive dummy2 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy >>>>> primitive dummy3 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy >>>>> colocation together inf: ( dummy1 dummy2 dummy3 ) >>>>> >>>>> and I expect them to run on the same host, but they are not and I >>>>> attached hb_report to the case to prove it. >>>>> >>>>> Andrew closed it with the comment "Thats because you have >>>>> sequential="false" for the colocation set." But sequential="false" means >>>>> doesn't matter what order do they start. >>>> >>>> No. Thats not what it means. >>>> And I believe I should know. >>>> >>>> It means that the members of the set are NOT collocated with each >>>> other, only with any preceding set. >>> >>> Just for clarification: >>> >>> colocation together inf: ( dummy1 dummy2 dummy3 ) dummy4 >>> >>> .... is a shortcut for: >>> >>> colocation together1 inf: dummy4 dummy1 >>> colocation together1 inf: dummy4 dummy2 >>> colocation together1 inf: dummy4 dummy3 >>> >>> ... is that correct? >> >> Only if sequential != false. > > You wanted to say "sequential == false"? > >> For some reason the shell appears to be setting that by default. > > This is sequential == false: > > colocation together inf: ( dummy1 dummy2 dummy3 ) dummy4 > > This is sequential == true: > > colocation together inf: dummy1 dummy2 dummy3 dummy4 > > Thanks, > > Dejan
I guess colocation syntax needs to be expanded to allow something like this colocation only-one -inf: (dummy1 dummy2 sequential="true") colocation together 5000: (dummy1 dummy2 sequential="true") Vadym _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
