Re: [ClusterLabs] resource location preference vs utilization
On Mon, 2019-07-15 at 18:41 +0200, wf...@niif.hu wrote: > Hi, > > In a mostly symmetrical cluster I've got a couple of resources which > should only ever run on a subset of the nodes if possible. However, > utilization constraints seem to prevent optimal resource allocation > in > some cases: Pacemaker does not migrate other resources to make room > for > the picky resources on their preferred nodes. Is there a way around > this? The score differences are way above the resource stickiness, > and > as soon as I manually move enough indifferent resources away from the > distinguished nodes, Pacemaker indeed migrates the picky resources > over > to them. Can I configure it to also make room automatically by > moving > other resources as necessary, making this process fully automatic? I'm not aware of any knobs to turn to affect that. Have you tried putting small negative location constraints for the non-picky resources on those nodes? Also, you could try putting a smaller stickiness on the non-picky resources (I don't know whether that will have any effect, just trying to think of ideas). -- Ken Gaillot ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] resource location preference vs utilization
"Ulrich Windl" writes: > schrieb am 15.07.2019 um 18:41 in Nachricht > <87o91vp7vv@lant.ki.iif.hu>: > >> In a mostly symmetrical cluster I've got a couple of resources which >> should only ever run on a subset of the nodes if possible. However, >> utilization constraints seem to prevent optimal resource allocation in >> some cases: Pacemaker does not migrate other resources to make room for >> the picky resources on their preferred nodes. Is there a way around >> this? The score differences are way above the resource stickiness, and >> as soon as I manually move enough indifferent resources away from the >> distinguished nodes, Pacemaker indeed migrates the picky resources over >> to them. Can I configure it to also make room automatically by moving >> other resources as necessary, making this process fully automatic? > > Maybe show your config in greater detail... I'd like to keep the XML level low until I get confirmation that what I'm after is actually supported. My configuration is very simple but extensive, and has the basic elements in place: I can see the scores and utilization values in the crm_simulate output. I have priorities set up as well, but all resources are running, so that shouldn't matter as far as I understand it. Maybe I miss a setting to enable such behavior... -- Feri ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
