[Pacemaker] Specifying stop and demote order

[Stefan Förster]

Follow-up to my own posting:

* Stefan Foerster <cite+pacemaker at incertum.net>:
> I have a number of primitives and a master/slave resource which need
> to be started in a given order. At first I was thinking about using a
> "group", but as things go with groups, seemingly independent resources
> might start to work if one of the group's resources fails (you cant
> specify that resources are independent of each other), and AFAIK you
> can't have groups in other groups (I might be wrong on both counts -
> if so, please let me know).
> 
> Now, what I've come up with is this:
> 
> 
>   <rsc_order id="order-DRBD_IP_FS_MySQL">
>     <resource_set id="order-set-DRBD" action="promote">
>       <resource_ref id="ms-DRBD_shared"/>
>     </resource_set>
>     <resource_set id="order-set-FS-and-IP" sequential="false" action="start">
>       <resource_ref id="prim-FS_shared"/>
>       <resource_ref id="prim-Failover_IP"/>
>     </resource_set>
>     <resource_set id="order-set-mysql" sequential="false" action="start">
>       <resource_ref id="prim-MySQL_db_test"/>
>       <resource_ref id="prim-MySQL_db_fax"/>
>       <resource_ref id="prim-MySQL_db_syslog"/>
>       <resource_ref id="prim-MySQL_db_nagios"/>
>       <resource_ref id="prim-MySQL_db_wiki"/>
>     </resource_set>
>   </rsc_order>
> 
> Obviously, this works very well for starting the resources - and does
> absolutely nothing for stopping them (e.g. if you migrate them to
> another node).

I have verified that this does indeed not stop resources in the
correct order. I always thought ordering constraints applied in both
directions, starting AND stopping - am I wrong here?


Cheers
Stefan