[Pacemaker] Node recover causes resource to migrate

[Andrew Beekhof]

On 24/07/2013, at 10:09 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb at suse.com> wrote:

> On 2013-07-24T21:40:40, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
> 
>>> Statically assigned nodeids?
>> Wouldn't hurt, but you still need to bring down the still-active node to get it to talk to the new node.
>> Which sucks 
> 
> Hm. But ... corosync/pacemaker ought to identify the node via the
> nodeid. If it comes back with a different IP address, that shouldn't be
> a problem.
> 
> Oh. *thud* Just realized that it's bound to be one for unicast
> communications, not so much mcast.

Exactly.

> Seems we may need some corosync magic
> commands to edit the nodelist at runtime. (Or is that already possible
> and I just don't know how? ;-)

I believe it might be possible - I just don't know it.
Might even be better to have it happen automagically - after-all the new node knows the existing node's address.

But good luck getting that one through.