Re: [ClusterLabs] 答复: Re: 答复: Re: clone resource not get restarted on fail

2017-02-15 Thread Dejan Muhamedagic
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:21:50AM -0600, Ken Gaillot wrote: > On 02/15/2017 03:57 AM, he.hailo...@zte.com.cn wrote: > > I just tried using colocation, it dosen't work. > > > > > > I failed the node paas-controller-3, but sdclient_vip didn't get moved: > > The colocation would work, but the prob

Re: [ClusterLabs] 答复: Re: 答复: Re: clone resource not get restarted on fail

2017-02-15 Thread Ken Gaillot
On 02/15/2017 03:57 AM, he.hailo...@zte.com.cn wrote: > I just tried using colocation, it dosen't work. > > > I failed the node paas-controller-3, but sdclient_vip didn't get moved: The colocation would work, but the problem you're having with router and apigateway is preventing it from getting

[ClusterLabs] 答复: Re: 答复: Re: clone resource not get restarted on fail

2017-02-15 Thread he.hailong5
I just tried using colocation, it dosen't work. I failed the node paas-controller-3, but sdclient_vip didn't get moved: Online: [ paas-controller-1 paas-controller-2 paas-controller-3 ] router_vip (ocf::heartbeat:IPaddr2): Started paas-controller-1 sdclient_vip (ocf::hea

[ClusterLabs] 答复: Re: 答复: Re: clone resource not get restarted on fail

2017-02-14 Thread he.hailong5
Is there a reason not to use a colocation constraint instead? If X_vipis colocated with X, it will be moved if X fails. [hhl]: the movement should take place as well if X stopped (the start is on-going). I don't know if the colocation would satisfy this requirement. I don't see any reason in your