On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 16:46 +0000, Norberto Lopes wrote: > Apologies but I'm not following. I'm probably misunderstanding > something. > > From what I could gather from https://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacem > aker/1.1/html/Pacemaker_Explained/_mandatory_placement.html I can't > follow the subtle difference between the two on a running cluster. As > an example: If backupVIP is already in node A and postgresMS:Master > in node B, and postgresMS:Master dies, in my case, postgresMS:Master > never gets promoted in node C. But from the -inf rule it should be > able to? > > Any insights into this would be greatly appreciated.
I don't see from this why that's happening; it may be related to other parts of the configuration. If you can attach your CIB (cibadmin -Q), that might help. > > On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 at 06:41 Ferenc Wágner <wf...@niif.hu> wrote: > > Norberto Lopes <nlopes...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > colocation backup-vip-not-with-master -inf: backupVIP > > postgresMS:Master > > > colocation backup-vip-not-with-master inf: backupVIP > > postgresMS:Slave > > > > > > > Basically what's occurring in my cluster is that the first rule > > stops the > > > Sync node from being promoted if the Master ever dies. The second > > doesn't > > > but I can't quite follow why. > > > > Getting a score of -inf means that the resource won't run. On the > > other > > hand, (+)inf just means "strongest" preference. > > -- > > Regards, > > Feri -- Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://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