> On 13 Aug 2015, at 10:23 am, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi All, > > We confirmed movement of > pacemaker_remote.(version:pacemaker-ad1f397a8228a63949f86c96597da5cecc3ed977) > > It is the following cluster constitution. > * sl7-01(KVM host) > * snmp1(Guest on the sl7-01 host) > * snmp2(Guest on the sl7-01 host) > > We prepared for the next CLI file to confirm the resource placement to remote > node. > > ------------------------------ > property no-quorum-policy="ignore" \ > stonith-enabled="false" \ > startup-fencing="false" > > rsc_defaults resource-stickiness="INFINITY" \ > migration-threshold="1" > > primitive remote-vm2 ocf:pacemaker:remote \ > params server="snmp1" \ > op monitor interval=3 timeout=15 > > primitive remote-vm3 ocf:pacemaker:remote \ > params server="snmp2" \ > op monitor interval=3 timeout=15 > > primitive dummy-remote-A Dummy \ > op start interval=0s timeout=60s \ > op monitor interval=30s timeout=60s \ > op stop interval=0s timeout=60s > > primitive dummy-remote-B Dummy \ > op start interval=0s timeout=60s \ > op monitor interval=30s timeout=60s \ > op stop interval=0s timeout=60s > > location loc1 dummy-remote-A \ > rule 200: #uname eq remote-vm3 \ > rule 100: #uname eq remote-vm2 \ > rule -inf: #uname eq sl7-01 > location loc2 dummy-remote-B \ > rule 200: #uname eq remote-vm3 \ > rule 100: #uname eq remote-vm2 \ > rule -inf: #uname eq sl7-01 > ------------------------------ > > Case 1) The resource is placed as follows when I spend the CLI file which we > prepared for. > However, the placement of the dummy-remote resource does not meet a > condition. > dummy-remote-A starts in remote-vm2. > > [root@sl7-01 ~]# crm_mon -1 -Af > Last updated: Thu Aug 13 08:49:09 2015 Last change: Thu Aug 13 > 08:41:14 2015 by root via cibadmin on sl7-01 > Stack: corosync > Current DC: sl7-01 (version 1.1.13-ad1f397) - partition WITHOUT quorum > 3 nodes and 4 resources configured > > Online: [ sl7-01 ] > RemoteOnline: [ remote-vm2 remote-vm3 ] > > dummy-remote-A (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started remote-vm2 > dummy-remote-B (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started remote-vm3 > remote-vm2 (ocf::pacemaker:remote): Started sl7-01 > remote-vm3 (ocf::pacemaker:remote): Started sl7-01
It is possible that there was a time when only remote-vm2 was available (so we put dummy-remote-A there) and then before we could start dummy-remote-B there too, remote-vm3 showed up but due to resource-stickiness=“INFINITY”, we didn’t move dummy-remote-A. > > (snip) > > Case 2) When we change CLI file of it and spend it, You lost me here :-) Can you rephrase please? > the resource is placed as follows. > The resource is placed definitely. > dummy-remote-A starts in remote-vm3. > dummy-remote-B starts in remote-vm3. > > > (snip) > location loc1 dummy-remote-A \ > rule 200: #uname eq remote-vm3 \ > rule 100: #uname eq remote-vm2 \ > rule -inf: #uname ne remote-vm2 and #uname ne remote-vm3 \ > rule -inf: #uname eq sl7-01 > location loc2 dummy-remote-B \ > rule 200: #uname eq remote-vm3 \ > rule 100: #uname eq remote-vm2 \ > rule -inf: #uname ne remote-vm2 and #uname ne remote-vm3 \ > rule -inf: #uname eq sl7-01 > (snip) > > > [root@sl7-01 ~]# crm_mon -1 -Af > Last updated: Thu Aug 13 08:55:28 2015 Last change: Thu Aug 13 > 08:55:22 2015 by root via cibadmin on sl7-01 > Stack: corosync > Current DC: sl7-01 (version 1.1.13-ad1f397) - partition WITHOUT quorum > 3 nodes and 4 resources configured > > Online: [ sl7-01 ] > RemoteOnline: [ remote-vm2 remote-vm3 ] > > dummy-remote-A (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started remote-vm3 > dummy-remote-B (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started remote-vm3 > remote-vm2 (ocf::pacemaker:remote): Started sl7-01 > remote-vm3 (ocf::pacemaker:remote): Started sl7-01 > > (snip) > > As for the placement of the resource being wrong with the first CLI file, the > placement limitation of the remote node is like remote resource not being > evaluated until it is done start. > > The placement becomes right with the CLI file which I revised, but the > description of this limitation is very troublesome when I compose a cluster > of more nodes. > > Does remote node not need processing delaying placement limitation until it > is done start? Potentially. I’d need a crm_report to confirm though. > > Is there a method to easily describe the limitation of the resource to remote > node? > > * As one means, we know that the placement of the resource goes well by > dividing the first CLI file into two. > * After a cluster sent CLI which remote node starts, I send CLI where a > cluster starts a resource. > * However, we do not want to divide CLI file into two if possible. > > Best Regards, > Hideo Yamauchi. > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: [email protected] > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
