im guessing this is just a "feature", but something that will probably stop me using groups
Scenario1 (working): 1) Two nodes (1,2) within a cluster (default-stickiness = INFINITY) 2) Two resources (A,B) in a cluster running on different nodes 3) colocation constraint between resources of A->B score=-1 a) pcs standby node2, the resource B moves to node 1 b) pcs unstandby node2, the resource B stays on node 1 - this is good and expected Secanrio 2 (working): 1) exactly the same as above but the resource exist within their own group (G1,G2) 2) the colocation constraint is between the groups Secanrio 3 (not working): 1) Same as above however each group has two resources in them Resource Group: A_grp A (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03 A_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03 Resource Group: B_grp B (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11 B_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11 a) pcs standby node2, the group moves to node 1 b) pcs unstandby node2, the group moves to node 2, but I have INFINITY stickiness (maybe I need INFINITY+1 ;) )???? crm_simulate -sL doesnt really explain why there is a difference. any ideas? (environment pacemaker-cluster-libs-1.1.16-12.el7.x86_64) /Ian
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://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