[Pacemaker] Anticolocation problem

[agutxi Agustin]

Hi guys,
I'm trying to setup some anticolocation rules, but I'm finding some
strange behaviour and not getting the desired effect, so  I wonder if
I'm missing something or there is really some problem with my
setting.If you could lend me a hand that would be great.

The scenario: 3 Dummy resources running based on utilization (1 core
for each resource running) on 2 nodes, each with 2 cores capacity.
Plus: Anticolocation rules: No 2 resources can run in the same node (I
know in this case I could limit this with utilization, but this is
just a test case from a bigger scenario where I detected the problem)
Configuration:
_______________________________________________________________________________
crm(live)# configure show
node vmHost1 \
	utilization cores="2"
node vmHost2 \
	utilization cores="2"
primitive DummyVM1 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy \
	op monitor interval="60s" timeout="60s" \
	op start on-fail="restart" interval="0" \
	op stop on-fail="ignore" interval="0" \
	utilization cores="1" \
	meta is-managed="true" migration-threshold="2" target-role="Started"
primitive DummyVM2 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy \
	op monitor interval="60s" timeout="60s" \
	op start on-fail="restart" interval="0" \
	op stop on-fail="ignore" interval="0" \
	utilization cores="1" \
	meta is-managed="true" migration-threshold="2" target-role="Started"
primitive DummyVM3 ocf:pacemaker:Dummy \
	op monitor interval="60s" timeout="60s" \
	op start on-fail="restart" interval="0" \
	op stop on-fail="ignore" interval="0" \
	utilization cores="1" \
	meta is-managed="true" migration-threshold="2" target-role="Stopped"
colocation antidummy12 -INF: DummyVM1 DummyVM2
colocation antidummy13 -INF: DummyVM1 DummyVM3
colocation antidummy23 -INF: DummyVM2 DummyVM3
property $id="cib-bootstrap-options" \
	dc-version="1.1.6-9971ebba4494012a93c03b40a2c58ec0eb60f50c" \
	cluster-infrastructure="openais" \
	expected-quorum-votes="2" \
	stonith-enabled="false" \
	stop-all-resources="false" \
	placement-strategy="utilization" \
	no-quorum-policy="ignore" \
	cluster-infrastructure="openais" \
	stop-orphan-resources="true" \
	stop-orphan-actions="true" \
	symmetric-cluster="true" \
	last-lrm-refresh="1326975274"
rsc_defaults $id="rsc-options" \
	resource-stickiness="INFINITY"
_______________________________________________________________________________

Looking around for symmetric anti-collocation information, I found a
message where Andrew Beekhof stated:

>>>> colocation X-Y -2: X Y
>>>> colocation Y-X -2: Y X
>>>>
>>> the second one is implied by the first and is therefore redundant
>>>
>> If only that were true!
>>
>
> It is. I know exactly how my code works in this regard.
> More than likely a score of -2 is simply too low to have any effect.

so I was expecting my resources to prevent another resource from
running on the same node.

Test: I start 2 resources: DummyVM1 & DUmmyVM2: they correctly start
on vmHost1 and vmHost2, as expected (I don't care about location)
_______________________________________________________________________________
crm(live)# status
============
Last updated: Mon Jan 30 13:33:19 2012
Last change: Mon Jan 30 13:30:21 2012 via cibadmin on vmHost1
Current DC: vmHost2 - partition with quorum
Version: 1.1.6-9971ebba4494012a93c03b40a2c58ec0eb60f50c
2 Nodes configured, 2 expected votes
3 Resources configured.
============

Online: [ vmHost1 vmHost2 ]

 DummyVM1	(ocf::pacemaker:Dummy):	Started vmHost1
 DummyVM2	(ocf::pacemaker:Dummy):	Started vmHost2
_______________________________________________________________________________

Then, I start the DummyVM3 resource:

_______________________________________________________________________________
crm(live)# resource start DummyVM3
crm(live)# status
============
Last updated: Mon Jan 30 13:33:52 2012
Last change: Mon Jan 30 13:33:50 2012 via cibadmin on vmHost1
Current DC: vmHost2 - partition with quorum
Version: 1.1.6-9971ebba4494012a93c03b40a2c58ec0eb60f50c
2 Nodes configured, 2 expected votes
3 Resources configured.
============

Online: [ vmHost1 vmHost2 ]

 DummyVM1	(ocf::pacemaker:Dummy):	Started vmHost1
 DummyVM2	(ocf::pacemaker:Dummy):	Started vmHost2
 DummyVM3	(ocf::pacemaker:Dummy):	Started vmHost1
_______________________________________________________________________________

and immediately DummyVM3 is started on vmHost1, though from my
understanding it shouldnt (anticolocation with -INF score).
I think the colocation scores are being ignored, is this possible?.
I checked with "ptest -saL" and it is not showing -INFINITY for my
colocation rules:

root at vmHost1:~# ptest -saL
Allocation scores:
native_color: DummyVM3 allocation score on vmHost1: INFINITY
native_color: DummyVM3 allocation score on vmHost2: 0
native_color: DummyVM2 allocation score on vmHost1: 0
native_color: DummyVM2 allocation score on vmHost2: INFINITY
native_color: DummyVM1 allocation score on vmHost1: INFINITY
native_color: DummyVM1 allocation score on vmHost2: 0

Can someone give me any hints as for what I am doing wrong?
Thank you guys,

Agustín

“Death: Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know, that in a
universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom.” ―
Terry Pratchett