>> In the attached pe- warn, why is resource R_audit being started on >> idm01 when there is an INFINITY constraint with uname eq idm04? >> >> BTW - idm04 is in standby at the moment. That should hardly matter. I >> expect the resource to be "cannot run anywhere". >> >> I really hope it's not a typo, but I have read it as much as I can, >> and I can't see it... >> >> Thanks Yan > > So, there is only one place it can be run, and it has score 0. (It > can't run on a machine in standby). > > So, it gets run there. > > What's the problem?
The problem is that I need the resource to _ONLY_ run on IDM04, or not at all. Yes, I know, this is not clustering, or HA, but there is a good reason. If you want the long story, the reason for that is that resource R_audit (an instance of Novell Audit) is not meant to be clustered here, but depends on resource R_workforce_edir (eDirectory instance), which IS clustered. The issue is that Novell Audit must start after eDirectory (Audit configuration is stored in eDir). So the best way I could think of achieving that, was to created a resource for Audit, with an order constraint between eDirectory and Audit. But since Audit isn't really clustered (executables on one node only), I need to make it run on IDM04, or nowhere. That what I thought INFINITY would mean. If -INFINITY achieves that, but INFINITY doesn't, then it looks like broken logic to me, where INFINITY is not the exact opposite of -INFINITY. If this is really "works as designed", it is very highly counter-intuitive, and IMHO should be considered a bug. Actually, INFINITY in colocation constraints _does_ mean, "work here or nowhere". Why would it be different for location constraints? Confused... Thanks for the answer Yan _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
