On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 4:47 PM Artem <tyom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 16:17, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 5:44 PM Artem <tyom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > pcs constraint location FAKE3 rule score=0 pingd lt 1 or not_defined pingd >> > pcs constraint location FAKE4 rule score=0 pingd lt 1 or not_defined pingd >> > pcs constraint location FAKE3 rule score=125 pingd gt 0 or defined pingd >> > pcs constraint location FAKE4 rule score=125 pingd gt 0 or defined pingd >> > >> >> These rules are contradicting. You set the score to 125 if pingd is >> defined and at the same time set it to 0 if the score is less than 1. >> To be "less than 1" it must be defined to start with so both rules >> will always apply. I do not know how the rules are ordered. Either you >> get random behavior, or one pair of these rules is effectively >> ignored. > > > "pingd lt 1 or not_defined pingd" means to me ==0 or not_defined, that is > ping fails to ping GW or fails to report to corosync/pacemaker. Am I wrong?
That is correct (although I'd reverse conditions out of habit. It meaningless to check for "less than 1" something that is not defined) > "pingd gt 0 or defined pingd" means to me that ping gets reply from GW and > reports it to cluster. No. As you were already told this is true if pingd is defined. Value does not matter. > Are they really contradicting? Yes. pingd == 0 will satisfy both rules. My use of "always" was incorrect, it does not happen for all possible values of pingd, but it does happen for some. _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
