[Pacemaker] Shouldn't colocation -inf: be mandatory?

[Vadym Chepkov]

On Jun 15, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
>>> 
>>> what about this part? what do I need to do to prevent them from running on different nodes for sure?
>> 
>> You can't have it both ways.
>> Either they have to run on the same node or they can remain active
>> when one or more die.
>> 
>> Although you could do:
>> 
>> d1 ( d2 d3 d4 )
>> 
>> That would almost get what you want, unless d1 dies.
> 
> I guess I would have to keep the most significant as an anchor, I can
> leave with it.
> Unfortunately, as far as I understand, there is no way do define this
> in shell config now, because shell adds sequential=false when it sees
> ().
> 

Actually, it can be done :)

dummy1 (d1 d2 d3 d4)
dummy1 will serve as an anchor which will never fail.
Not an elegant, but working solution, and the only one for two resources set.
Just need support from shell to describe it properly.
Goes to my HOWTO :)

Thanks,
Vadym