[Pacemaker] rsc_location does not work.

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hi Hideo-san,

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:28:52AM +0900, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We constituted the complicated cluster of three nodes.(2ACT+1STB)
> 
> We built a cluster by the next combination.
> 
>  * corosync-1.1.2
>  * Reusable-Cluster-Components-fa44a169d55f
>  * Cluster-Resource-Agents-6f02f8ad7fd4
>  * Pacemaker-1-0-d990c453b999
> 
> The resource of group02-1 hoped that it started in an active node.(srv01)

According to ptest and the current CIB it should be running on
srv01:

[0]rondo:problem > ptest -s -x srv01/cib.xml | grep group02-1
group_color: group02-1 allocation score on srv01: 200
group_color: group02-1 allocation score on srv02: -1000000
group_color: group02-1 allocation score on srv03: 100

There are two more location constraints:

location pingd-group02-1 group02-1 \
        rule $id="pingd-grou02-1-rule-1" -inf: defined default_ping_set and default_ping_set lt 100
location diskd-group02-1 group02-1 \
        rule $id="diskd-grou02-1-rule-1" -inf: defined default_ping_set2 and default_ping_set2 lt 100

Could it be that due to high default-resource-stickiness
(INFINITY) the group prefers to stay where it was once placed. At
least in the configuration explained there is this stated in
connection with ping attributes:

	...  or instead you can tell the cluster only to prefer nodes
	with the most connectivity. Just be sure to set the
	multiplier to a value higher than that of resource-stickiness
	(and don’t set either of them to INFINITY).

The hb_report doesn't contain the latest pe input file, so one
can't say if the two location constraints quoted above made
the group move once in the past away from srv01.

Finally, are you sure you need these collocations:

colocation rsc_colocation02-1-1 inf: group02-1 clnPingd
colocation rsc_colocation02-1-2 inf: group02-1 clnPingd2

Thanks,

Dejan

> But, against rsc_location which I appointed, the resource is started in a standby node.(srv03)
> 
> ------ output crm_mon -------------------------
>  Resource Group: UMgroup01
>      UmDummy01  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy01):       Started srv01
>      UmDummy02  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv01
>      UmIPaddr   (ocf::heartbeat:IPaddr):        Started srv01
>  Resource Group: group02-1
>      Dummy01-1  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv03
>      Dummy01-2  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv03
>  Resource Group: group02-2
>      Dummy02-1  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv02
>      Dummy02-2  (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started srv02
>  Resource Group: grpStonith1
>      prmStonithN1-1     (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv03
>  Resource Group: grpStonith2
>      prmStonithN2-1     (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01
>  Resource Group: grpStonith3
>      prmStonithN3-1     (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02
>  Clone Set: clnUMgroup01
>      Started: [ srv01 srv03 ]
>  Clone Set: clnPingd
>      Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ]
>  Clone Set: clnPingd2
>      Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ]
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> ------ cib.xml group02-1 rsc_location --------------
>       <rsc_location id="grp02-1-1-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv01" score="200"/>
>       <rsc_location id="grp02-1-2-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv03" score="100"/>
>       <rsc_location id="grp02-1-3-location" rsc="group02-1" node="srv02" score="-INFINITY"/>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> Will my cib.xml be a mistake? 
> Or will it be a bug?
> 
> And I attach hb_report.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
> 
> 


> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list
> Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker