Mailing List Archive

Hi

Thanks, I just tried :
colocation fs-img with vg
colocation vm with vg

but the problem remains :
if the vm fails, it is not migrated despite the migration-threshold=1, as the vg remains "Started" locally and has no problem.
In fact, I would need a parameter to force the vg to move in case of vm or fs-img failure, but I think it is not possible for now ...

Alain
________________________________________
De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Ulrich Windl [Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de]
Envoyé : mardi 25 août 2015 10:18
À : General Linux-HA mailing list
Objet : [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)

>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
Nachricht
<DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net

:
> Hi
>
> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these

> resources:
>
> Res1
> Res2
> Res3
> Res4
> Res5
>
> with current colocation constraints :
> Res2 with Res1
> Res3 with Res2

I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints; can you
try
R2 with R1
R3 with R1
(and related) instead?

>
> Res4 with Res1
> Res5 with Res4
>
> and current order symmetrical constraints :
> Res2 after Res1
> Res3 after Res2
>
> Res4 after Res1
> Res5 after Res4
>
> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>
> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the

> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>
> Is there a solution ?
>
> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>
> Res1=VGA
> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
LV)
> Res3=VM1
> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
VGA
> LV)
> Res5=VM2
>
> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
> mounted and before the VM is started.
>
> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>
> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>
> Thanks
> Alain Moullé
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha



_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

Hi
Sorry, I must admit that the cause of the problem was due to some resources configured inside vm (remote-node) and which take much too long to stop .
Now that this is fixed, a vm crash leads to migration of the vm resource and all the resources linked to the same VG.
Thanks
Alain

________________________________________
De : MOULLE, ALAIN
Envoyé : mardi 25 août 2015 10:50
À : Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead
Objet : RE:[Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)

Hi

Thanks, I just tried :
colocation fs-img with vg
colocation vm with vg

but the problem remains :
if the vm fails, it is not migrated despite the migration-threshold=1, as the vg remains "Started" locally and has no problem.
In fact, I would need a parameter to force the vg to move in case of vm or fs-img failure, but I think it is not possible for now ...

Alain
________________________________________
De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Ulrich Windl [Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de]
Envoyé : mardi 25 août 2015 10:18
À : General Linux-HA mailing list
Objet : [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)

>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
Nachricht
<DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net

:
> Hi
>
> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these

> resources:
>
> Res1
> Res2
> Res3
> Res4
> Res5
>
> with current colocation constraints :
> Res2 with Res1
> Res3 with Res2

I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints; can you
try
R2 with R1
R3 with R1
(and related) instead?

>
> Res4 with Res1
> Res5 with Res4
>
> and current order symmetrical constraints :
> Res2 after Res1
> Res3 after Res2
>
> Res4 after Res1
> Res5 after Res4
>
> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>
> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the

> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>
> Is there a solution ?
>
> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>
> Res1=VGA
> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
LV)
> Res3=VM1
> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
VGA
> LV)
> Res5=VM2
>
> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
> mounted and before the VM is started.
>
> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>
> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>
> Thanks
> Alain Moullé
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha



_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

> On 25 Aug 2015, at 6:18 pm, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>
>>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
> Nachricht
> <DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net
>
> :
>> Hi
>>
>> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these
>
>> resources:
>>
>> Res1
>> Res2
>> Res3
>> Res4
>> Res5
>>
>> with current colocation constraints :
>> Res2 with Res1
>> Res3 with Res2
>
> I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints;

?

> can you
> try
> R2 with R1
> R3 with R1
> (and related) instead?

No no no.
This has the opposite effect, a failure of R3 could easily result in /none/ of the resources moving.

Better to just change:

>> Res4 with Res1

to:
Res4 with Res3

Newer versions might do better with the existing config too.
If not, attach a crm_report :)

>> Res5 with Res4
>>
>> and current order symmetrical constraints :
>> Res2 after Res1
>> Res3 after Res2
>>
>> Res4 after Res1
>> Res5 after Res4
>>
>> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>>
>> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the
>
>> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>>
>> Is there a solution ?
>>
>> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>>
>> Res1=VGA
>> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
> LV)
>> Res3=VM1
>> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
> VGA
>> LV)
>> Res5=VM2
>>
>> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
>> mounted and before the VM is started.
>>
>> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
>> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
>> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>>
>> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
>> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Alain Moullé
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

Hi Andrew

in fact, my real problem was simplier like this one described as a simplified example of my configuration :
(I'm working with pacemaker from RHEL7.1 GA (1.1.12-22) )

Let's say for the example that we have in a two-nodes configuration these 5 resources :
1 resource VGA (ocf:heartbeat:LVM)
1 resource fs-img-for-vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
1 resource vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
1 resource fs-img-for-vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
1 resource vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
knowing that both fs-img are on LVs in VGA

So I have to set these constraints :
prefered location VGA on node1
order fs-img-vm1 after VGA
order fs-img-vm2 after VGA
order vm1 after fs-img-vm1
order vm2 after fs-img-vm2
colocation fs-img-vm1 with VGA
colocation fs-img-vm2 with VGA
colocation vm1 with fs-img-vm1
colocation vm2 with fs-img-vm2

but I unfornutately, I want that the vm2 (and fs-img-vm2) never starts on node2, said in another way : I want that if VGA is on node1 all resources fs-img-vm1, fs-img-vm2, vm1 and vm2 must be started on node1,
but if VGA for whatever reason has been migrated on node2, I want that only resources VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 are started on node2, both others fs-img-vm2 and vm2 remainig "Stopped"

So I add the constraint location fs-img-vm2 avoids node2 (hence +INF)

But testing this configuration, none of the 5 resources can never start on vm2.

In my understanding, due to my choice of setting colocation that way : fs with VGA , and vm with fs, I was thinking that pacemaker, when migrating on node2, could start VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 on node2 and leave fs-img-vm2 and vm2 "Stopped".

Am I wrong ?
And is there a way to get this behavior ?

Thanks a lot
Alain

________________________________________
De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Andrew Beekhof [andrew@beekhof.net]
Envoyé : vendredi 28 août 2015 04:31
À : Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead
Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)

> On 25 Aug 2015, at 6:18 pm, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>
>>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
> Nachricht
> <DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net
>
> :
>> Hi
>>
>> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these
>
>> resources:
>>
>> Res1
>> Res2
>> Res3
>> Res4
>> Res5
>>
>> with current colocation constraints :
>> Res2 with Res1
>> Res3 with Res2
>
> I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints;

?

> can you
> try
> R2 with R1
> R3 with R1
> (and related) instead?

No no no.
This has the opposite effect, a failure of R3 could easily result in /none/ of the resources moving.

Better to just change:

>> Res4 with Res1

to:
Res4 with Res3

Newer versions might do better with the existing config too.
If not, attach a crm_report :)

>> Res5 with Res4
>>
>> and current order symmetrical constraints :
>> Res2 after Res1
>> Res3 after Res2
>>
>> Res4 after Res1
>> Res5 after Res4
>>
>> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>>
>> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the
>
>> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>>
>> Is there a solution ?
>>
>> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>>
>> Res1=VGA
>> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
> LV)
>> Res3=VM1
>> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
> VGA
>> LV)
>> Res5=VM2
>>
>> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
>> mounted and before the VM is started.
>>
>> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
>> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
>> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>>
>> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
>> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Alain Moullé
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

> On 2 Sep 2015, at 9:42 pm, MOULLE, ALAIN <alain.moulle@atos.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew
>
> in fact, my real problem was simplier like this one described as a simplified example of my configuration :
> (I'm working with pacemaker from RHEL7.1 GA (1.1.12-22) )
>
> Let's say for the example that we have in a two-nodes configuration these 5 resources :
> 1 resource VGA (ocf:heartbeat:LVM)
> 1 resource fs-img-for-vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
> 1 resource vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
> 1 resource fs-img-for-vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
> 1 resource vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
> knowing that both fs-img are on LVs in VGA
>
> So I have to set these constraints :
> prefered location VGA on node1
> order fs-img-vm1 after VGA
> order fs-img-vm2 after VGA
> order vm1 after fs-img-vm1
> order vm2 after fs-img-vm2
> colocation fs-img-vm1 with VGA
> colocation fs-img-vm2 with VGA
> colocation vm1 with fs-img-vm1
> colocation vm2 with fs-img-vm2
>
> but I unfornutately, I want that the vm2 (and fs-img-vm2) never starts on node2, said in another way : I want that if VGA is on node1 all resources fs-img-vm1, fs-img-vm2, vm1 and vm2 must be started on node1,
> but if VGA for whatever reason has been migrated on node2, I want that only resources VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 are started on node2, both others fs-img-vm2 and vm2 remainig "Stopped"
>
> So I add the constraint location fs-img-vm2 avoids node2 (hence +INF)
>
> But testing this configuration, none of the 5 resources can never start on vm2.

You mean “node2” here right?

>
> In my understanding, due to my choice of setting colocation that way : fs with VGA , and vm with fs, I was thinking that pacemaker, when migrating on node2, could start VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 on node2 and leave fs-img-vm2 and vm2 "Stopped".
>
> Am I wrong ?
> And is there a way to get this behavior ?

Should be, attach your cib?

>
> Thanks a lot
> Alain
>
> ________________________________________
> De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Andrew Beekhof [andrew@beekhof.net]
> Envoyé : vendredi 28 août 2015 04:31
> À : Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead
> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)
>
>> On 25 Aug 2015, at 6:18 pm, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>>
>>>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
>> Nachricht
>> <DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net
>>
>> :
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these
>>
>>> resources:
>>>
>>> Res1
>>> Res2
>>> Res3
>>> Res4
>>> Res5
>>>
>>> with current colocation constraints :
>>> Res2 with Res1
>>> Res3 with Res2
>>
>> I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints;
>
> ?
>
>> can you
>> try
>> R2 with R1
>> R3 with R1
>> (and related) instead?
>
> No no no.
> This has the opposite effect, a failure of R3 could easily result in /none/ of the resources moving.
>
> Better to just change:
>
>>> Res4 with Res1
>
> to:
> Res4 with Res3
>
> Newer versions might do better with the existing config too.
> If not, attach a crm_report :)
>
>>> Res5 with Res4
>>>
>>> and current order symmetrical constraints :
>>> Res2 after Res1
>>> Res3 after Res2
>>>
>>> Res4 after Res1
>>> Res5 after Res4
>>>
>>> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>>>
>>> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the
>>
>>> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>>>
>>> Is there a solution ?
>>>
>>> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>>>
>>> Res1=VGA
>>> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
>> LV)
>>> Res3=VM1
>>> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
>> VGA
>>> LV)
>>> Res5=VM2
>>>
>>> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
>>> mounted and before the VM is started.
>>>
>>> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
>>> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
>>> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>>>
>>> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
>>> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Alain Moullé
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

Hi
You're right Andrew, this works fine with such a simplified configuration ...
human error
Sorry
Alain
________________________________________
De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Andrew Beekhof [andrew@beekhof.net]
Envoyé : lundi 14 septembre 2015 04:25
À : Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead
Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)

> On 2 Sep 2015, at 9:42 pm, MOULLE, ALAIN <alain.moulle@atos.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew
>
> in fact, my real problem was simplier like this one described as a simplified example of my configuration :
> (I'm working with pacemaker from RHEL7.1 GA (1.1.12-22) )
>
> Let's say for the example that we have in a two-nodes configuration these 5 resources :
> 1 resource VGA (ocf:heartbeat:LVM)
> 1 resource fs-img-for-vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
> 1 resource vm1 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
> 1 resource fs-img-for-vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:Filesystem)
> 1 resource vm2 (ocf:heartbeat:VirtualDomain)
> knowing that both fs-img are on LVs in VGA
>
> So I have to set these constraints :
> prefered location VGA on node1
> order fs-img-vm1 after VGA
> order fs-img-vm2 after VGA
> order vm1 after fs-img-vm1
> order vm2 after fs-img-vm2
> colocation fs-img-vm1 with VGA
> colocation fs-img-vm2 with VGA
> colocation vm1 with fs-img-vm1
> colocation vm2 with fs-img-vm2
>
> but I unfornutately, I want that the vm2 (and fs-img-vm2) never starts on node2, said in another way : I want that if VGA is on node1 all resources fs-img-vm1, fs-img-vm2, vm1 and vm2 must be started on node1,
> but if VGA for whatever reason has been migrated on node2, I want that only resources VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 are started on node2, both others fs-img-vm2 and vm2 remainig "Stopped"
>
> So I add the constraint location fs-img-vm2 avoids node2 (hence +INF)
>
> But testing this configuration, none of the 5 resources can never start on vm2.

You mean “node2” here right?

>
> In my understanding, due to my choice of setting colocation that way : fs with VGA , and vm with fs, I was thinking that pacemaker, when migrating on node2, could start VGA, fs-img-vm1 and vm1 on node2 and leave fs-img-vm2 and vm2 "Stopped".
>
> Am I wrong ?
> And is there a way to get this behavior ?

Should be, attach your cib?

>
> Thanks a lot
> Alain
>
> ________________________________________
> De : linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org [linux-ha-bounces@lists.linux-ha.org] de la part de Andrew Beekhof [andrew@beekhof.net]
> Envoyé : vendredi 28 août 2015 04:31
> À : Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead
> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Question around resources constraints (pacemaker on RHE7.1)
>
>> On 25 Aug 2015, at 6:18 pm, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
>>
>>>>> "MOULLE, ALAIN" <alain.moulle@atos.net> schrieb am 21.08.2015 um 15:27 in
>> Nachricht
>> <DF84CFF8A85AB546B2D53FFF122677270220DA@FRAUVJ99EX5MSX.ww931.my-it-solutions.net
>>
>> :
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I can't find a way to configure constraints in pacemaker so that with these
>>
>>> resources:
>>>
>>> Res1
>>> Res2
>>> Res3
>>> Res4
>>> Res5
>>>
>>> with current colocation constraints :
>>> Res2 with Res1
>>> Res3 with Res2
>>
>> I think pacemaker still cannot do transitive location constraints;
>
> ?
>
>> can you
>> try
>> R2 with R1
>> R3 with R1
>> (and related) instead?
>
> No no no.
> This has the opposite effect, a failure of R3 could easily result in /none/ of the resources moving.
>
> Better to just change:
>
>>> Res4 with Res1
>
> to:
> Res4 with Res3
>
> Newer versions might do better with the existing config too.
> If not, attach a crm_report :)
>
>>> Res5 with Res4
>>>
>>> and current order symmetrical constraints :
>>> Res2 after Res1
>>> Res3 after Res2
>>>
>>> Res4 after Res1
>>> Res5 after Res4
>>>
>>> and migration-threshold=1 on all resources .
>>>
>>> What I want it that if I have a failure for example on Res3 is that all the
>>
>>> 5 Ressources are migrated.
>>>
>>> Is there a solution ?
>>>
>>> For example , with an HA LVM configuration and VM resources :
>>>
>>> Res1=VGA
>>> Res2=FS-img-VM1 (where are the VM1 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on VGA
>> LV)
>>> Res3=VM1
>>> Res4=FS-img-VM2 (where are the VM2 image and .xml) (FS-img-VM1 is on another
>> VGA
>>> LV)
>>> Res5=VM2
>>>
>>> So current constraints are so that VGA is activated before the FS-img is
>>> mounted and before the VM is started.
>>>
>>> But I want that if the VM1 fails, it can migrate on another node (together
>>> with all other 4 resources) but with only the constraints above, the VGA
>>> stalls the migration of the VM ...
>>>
>>> Is there any solution by constraints configuration ?
>>> Note : we can't use group resources for now, because VMs are remote-nodes.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Alain Moullé
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
>> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
> Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha

_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list is closing down.
Please subscribe to users@clusterlabs.org instead.
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha