[Pacemaker] Resource colocation with a clone

[Andrew Beekhof]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Brice
Figureau<brice-puppet at daysofwonder.com> wrote:
> On 17/08/09 14:22, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Brice
>> Figureau<brice+ha at daysofwonder.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 14:00 +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Brice
>>>> Figureau<brice+ha at daysofwonder.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was wondering if colocating with a clone would work,
>>>>
>>>> That allows the resource to keep running as long as at least one node
>>>> has a copy of the clone running.
>>>> Not sure if that helps in your scenario
>>>
>>> Are you sure?
>>
>> very
>
> Indeed this helps. What I'm not sure and can't find a definite answer about
> is if the current clone resource running on the same node as the vip
> (colocated with the clone) fails (ie it reaches migration-threshold), then
> this colocated resource will move in another place where another member of
> said clone still runs.

Naturally :-)
If the instance fails it will be stopped and the colocation constraint
will ensure the VIP is moved.

>
> That, and my other question (in another thread here) about setting a score
> << inf or >> -inf for colocated resource doesn't seem to work as advertised
> (or I didn't understand it, which is well possible :-)).

What was the actual vs. expected behavior?