On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Phil Frost wrote:
> On 07/29/2012 11:15 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>
>> If I run:
>>
>> tools/crm_simulate -x ~/Dropbox/phil.xml -Ss | grep "promotion score"
>>
>> I see:
>>
>> drbd_exports:1 promotion score on storage02: 110
>> drbd_exports:0 promotion score on s
On 07/29/2012 11:15 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
If I run:
tools/crm_simulate -x ~/Dropbox/phil.xml -Ss | grep "promotion score"
I see:
drbd_exports:1 promotion score on storage02: 110
drbd_exports:0 promotion score on storage01: 6
The 100 coming from one of your rules which says:
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:59 AM, Phil Frost wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 01:29 PM, David Vossel wrote:
>>
>> I've been looking into multistate resource colocations quite a bit this
>> week. I have a branch I'm working with that may improve this situation for
>> you.
>>
>> If you are feeling brave, test
On 06/28/2012 01:29 PM, David Vossel wrote:
I've been looking into multistate resource colocations quite a bit this week.
I have a branch I'm working with that may improve this situation for you.
If you are feeling brave, test this branch out with your configuration and see
if it fairs better
- Original Message -
> From: "Phil Frost"
> To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 9:23:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] resources not migrating when some are not runnable
> on one node, maybe because of groups or
> master/slave clon
On 06/22/2012 04:40 AM, Andreas Kurz wrote:
I took a look at the cib in case2 and saw this in the status for storage02.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>storage02 will not give up the drbd master since it has a higher score that storage01. This coupled with
On 06/21/2012 11:30 PM, David Vossel wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Phil Frost"
>> To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 4:25:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] resources not migrating when some are not runnable
&g
- Original Message -
> From: "Phil Frost"
> To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 4:25:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] resources not migrating when some are not runnable
> on one node, maybe because of groups or
> master/slave clon
On 06/19/2012 04:31 PM, David Vossel wrote:
Can you attach a crm_report of what happens when you put the two nodes in
standby please? Being able to see the xml and how the policy engine evaluates
the transitions is helpful.
The resulting reports were a bit big for the list, so I put them in
- Original Message -
> From: "Phil Frost"
> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager"
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 8:39:48 AM
> Subject: [Pacemaker] resources not migrating when some are not runnable on
> one node, maybe because of groups
On 06/18/2012 04:14 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 18.06.2012 16:39, Phil Frost wrote:
>> I'm attempting to configure an NFS cluster, and I've observed that under
>> some failure conditions, resources that depend on a failed resource
>> simply stop, and no migration to another node is attempted, e
On 06/18/2012 10:05 AM, Jake Smith wrote:
Why don't you have vg_nfsexports in the group? Not really any point to
a group with only one resource...
You need an order constraint here too... Pacemaker needs to know in
what order to start/stop/promote things. Something like: order
ord_drbd_maste
On 06/18/2012 10:14 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
Sets (constraints with more then two members) are evaluated in the
different order.
Try
colocation colo_drbd_master inf: ( drbd_nfsexports_ms:Master ) (
vg_nfsexports ) ( test )
I'm sure that's the wrong order. I've put the parens on each resour
18.06.2012 16:39, Phil Frost wrote:
> I'm attempting to configure an NFS cluster, and I've observed that under
> some failure conditions, resources that depend on a failed resource
> simply stop, and no migration to another node is attempted, even though
> a manual migration demonstrates the other
- Original Message -
> From: "Phil Frost"
> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager"
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 9:39:48 AM
> Subject: [Pacemaker] resources not migrating when some are not runnable on
> one node, maybe because of groups
I'm attempting to configure an NFS cluster, and I've observed that under
some failure conditions, resources that depend on a failed resource
simply stop, and no migration to another node is attempted, even though
a manual migration demonstrates the other node can run all resources,
and the reso
16 matches
Mail list logo