>>> Nikhil Utane <nikhil.subscri...@gmail.com> schrieb am 13.10.2016 um 16:43 in
Nachricht
<cagnwmjubpucnbgxrohkhsbq0lxovwslfpkupg1r8gjqrfqm...@mail.gmail.com>:
> Ulrich,
> 
> I have 4 resources only (not 5, nodes are 5). So then I only need 6
> constraints, right?
> 
>      [,1]   [,2]   [,3]   [,4]   [,5]  [,6]
> [1,] "A"  "A"  "A"    "B"   "B"    "C"
> [2,] "B"  "C"  "D"   "C"  "D"    "D"

Sorry for my confusion. As Andrei Borzenkovsaid in 
<caa91j0w+epahflg9u6vx_x8lgfkf9rp55g3nocy4ozna9bb...@mail.gmail.com> you 
probably have to add (A, B) _and_ (B, A)! Thinking about it, I wonder whether 
an easier solution would be using "utilization": If every node has one token to 
give, and every resource needs on token, no two resources will run on one node. 
Sounds like an easier solution to me.

Regards,
Ulrich


> 
> I understand that if I configure constraint of R1 with R2 score as
> -infinity, then the same applies for R2 with R1 score as -infinity (don't
> have to configure it explicitly).
> I am not having a problem of multiple resources getting schedule on the
> same node. Rather, one working resource is unnecessarily getting relocated.
> 
> -Thanks
> Nikhil
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Ulrich Windl <
> ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi!
>>
>> Don't you need 10 constraints, excluding every possible pair of your 5
>> resources (named A-E here), like in this table (produced with R):
>>
>>      [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9] [,10]
>> [1,] "A"  "A"  "A"  "A"  "B"  "B"  "B"  "C"  "C"  "D"
>> [2,] "B"  "C"  "D"  "E"  "C"  "D"  "E"  "D"  "E"  "E"
>>
>> Ulrich
>>
>> >>> Nikhil Utane <nikhil.subscri...@gmail.com> schrieb am 13.10.2016 um
>> 15:59 in
>> Nachricht
>> <cagnwmjw0cwmr3bvr3l9xzcacjuzyczqbzezuzpajxi+pn7o...@mail.gmail.com>:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have 5 nodes and 4 resources configured.
>> > I have configured constraint such that no two resources can be
>> co-located.
>> > I brought down a node (which happened to be DC). I was expecting the
>> > resource on the failed node would be migrated to the 5th waiting node
>> (that
>> > is not running any resource).
>> > However what happened was the failed node resource was started on another
>> > active node (after stopping it's existing resource) and that node's
>> > resource was moved to the waiting node.
>> >
>> > What could I be doing wrong?
>> >
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-have-watchdog" value="true"
>> > name="have-watchdog"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-dc-version" value="1.1.14-5a6cdd1"
>> > name="dc-version"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-cluster-infrastructure"
>> value="corosync"
>> > name="cluster-infrastructure"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-stonith-enabled" value="false"
>> > name="stonith-enabled"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-no-quorum-policy" value="ignore"
>> > name="no-quorum-policy"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-default-action-timeout" value="240"
>> > name="default-action-timeout"/>
>> > <nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-symmetric-cluster" value="false"
>> > name="symmetric-cluster"/>
>> >
>> > # pcs constraint
>> > Location Constraints:
>> >   Resource: cu_2
>> >     Enabled on: Redun_CU4_Wb30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU2_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU3_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU5_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU1_WB30 (score:0)
>> >   Resource: cu_3
>> >     Enabled on: Redun_CU4_Wb30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU2_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU3_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU5_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU1_WB30 (score:0)
>> >   Resource: cu_4
>> >     Enabled on: Redun_CU4_Wb30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU2_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU3_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU5_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU1_WB30 (score:0)
>> >   Resource: cu_5
>> >     Enabled on: Redun_CU4_Wb30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU2_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU3_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU5_WB30 (score:0)
>> >     Enabled on: Redund_CU1_WB30 (score:0)
>> > Ordering Constraints:
>> > Colocation Constraints:
>> >   cu_3 with cu_2 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >   cu_4 with cu_2 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >   cu_4 with cu_3 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >   cu_5 with cu_2 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >   cu_5 with cu_3 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >   cu_5 with cu_4 (score:-INFINITY)
>> >
>> > -Thanks
>> > Nikhil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org 
>> 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: Users@clusterlabs.org
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

Reply via email to