[Pacemaker] N+1 and equal priority resource groups

[Igal Baevsky]

Andrew Beekhof <andrew at ...> writes:

> So sumarizing your setup as group-{1,2,3}; node-{1,2,3,4} where node-4 is 
the hot 
spare; and that group-N
> prefers node-N...
> In what scenario would group-1 legitimately end up on node-2 or node-3?
> 

group-1 should only be able to end up on node-2 or node-3 if no other group 
is running 
on them and node-4 is unavailable (down or taken by group-2/3).