im guessing this is just a "feature", but something that will probably stop
me using groups
Scenario1 (working):
1) Two nodes (1,2) within a cluster (default-stickiness = INFINITY)
2) Two resources (A,B) in a cluster running on different nodes
3) colocation constraint between resources of A->B score=-1
a) pcs standby node2, the resource B moves to node 1
b) pcs unstandby node2, the resource B stays on node 1 - this is good and
expected
Secanrio 2 (working):
1) exactly the same as above but the resource exist within their own group
(G1,G2)
2) the colocation constraint is between the groups
Secanrio 3 (not working):
1) Same as above however each group has two resources in them
Resource Group: A_grp
A (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03
A_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03
Resource Group: B_grp
B (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11
B_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11
a) pcs standby node2, the group moves to node 1
b) pcs unstandby node2, the group moves to node 2, but I have INFINITY
stickiness (maybe I need INFINITY+1 ;) )????
crm_simulate -sL doesnt really explain why there is a difference.
any ideas? (environment pacemaker-cluster-libs-1.1.16-12.el7.x86_64)
/Ian
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list: [email protected]
https://lists.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
