[Pacemaker] One more globally-unique clone question

[Andrew Beekhof]

> On 24 Feb 2015, at 4:35 pm, Vladislav Bogdanov <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
> 
> 24.02.2015 01:58, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> 
>>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 5:08 pm, Vladislav Bogdanov <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 21.01.2015 03:51, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 20 Jan 2015, at 4:13 pm, Vladislav Bogdanov <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 20.01.2015 02:47, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 17 Jan 2015, at 1:25 am, Vladislav Bogdanov
>>>>>>> <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Trying to reproduce problem with early stop of globally-unique
>>>>>>> clone instances during move to another node I found one more
>>>>>>> "interesting" problem.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Due to the different order of resources in the CIB and extensive
>>>>>>> use of constraints between other resources (odd number of resources
>>>>>>> cluster-wide) two CLUSTERIP instances are always allocated to the
>>>>>>> same node in the new testing cluster.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ah, so this is why broker-vips:1 was moving.
>>>>> 
>>>>> That are two different 2-node clusters with different order of resources.
>>>>> In the first one broker-vips go after even number of resources, and one instance wants to return to a "mother-node" after it is brought back online, thus broker-vips:1 is moving.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the second one, broker-vips go after odd number of resources (actually three more resources are allocated to one node due to constraints) and both boker-vips go to another node.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What would be the best/preferred way to make them run on different
>>>>>>> nodes by default?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> By default they will. I'm assuming its the constraints that are
>>>>>> preventing this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I only see that they are allocated similar to any other resources.
>>>> 
>>>> Are they allocated in stages though?
>>>> Ie. Was there a point at which the "mother-node" was available but constraints prevented broker-vips:1 running there?
>>> 
>>> There are three pe-inputs for the node start.
>>> First one starts fence device for the other node, dlm+clvm+gfs and drbd on the online-back node.
>>> Second one tries to start/promote/move everything else until it is interrupted (by the drbd RA?).
>>> Third one finishes that attempt.
>> 
>> I've lost all context on this and I don't seem to be able to reconstruct it :)
>> Which part of the above is the problem?
> 
> ;)
> 
> In this thread the point is:
> * all resources have the same default priority
> * there are several triples of resources which are grouped by order/colocation constraints. Let's call them "triples".
> * There is globally-unique cluster-ip clone with clone-max=2 clone-node-max=2 stickiness=0, which is allocated after all "triples" (it goes after them in CIB).
> * If number of "triples" is odd, then in two-node cluster both cluster-ip instances are allocated to the same node.
> 

Very clear, thankyou :-)
Was there a crm_report associated with this somewhere?  Its not showing up in this thread.