[Pacemaker] Resource inter-dependency without being a 'group'

Florian Haas florian at hastexo.com
Sat Feb 18 16:33:17 EST 2012

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 7:19 PM, David Coulson <david at davidcoulson.net> wrote:
> I have an active/active LVS cluster, which uses pacemaker for managing IP
> resources. Currently I have one environment running on it which utilizes ~30
> IP addresses, so a group was created so all resources could be
> stopped/started together. Downside of that is that all resources have to run
> on the same node.
> [...]
> Is there a recommendation or best practice for this type of configuration?
> Is there something similar to 'group', which allows all the resources to be
> referenced as a single 'parent' resource without requiring them all to run
> on the same node?

Is setting "meta collocated=false" not working for your group?


Need help with High Availability?

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list