[Pacemaker] symmetrical ordering flaw for multi-state resources

[Latrous, Youssef]

Reposting from few weeks ago as I didn't get any answer yet :-(

I included below the original post and tried to rephrase it in this second one, hoping my concern will be understood.

I tried to use a dummy multi-state RA and have an asymmetrical ordering dependency to another resource (B). While an equivalent ordering to the same resource, but from a regular resource, works just fine, it did not work for the multi-state RA. What I mean by it didn't work is that it stopped the multi-state RA, when the resource (B) was stopped, but the regular resource kept running as expected (and documented in pacemaker)!

Is this a bug in pacemaker or is it known to not work with multi-state RAs? Other possibility, there a different way of using the "symmetrical" option for multi-state RA ordering?

Please, help!

Regards,

Youssef

PS. Below is the original post.

Hi,

I was trying to express the following:
   * Configure 3 resources:
      * A: multi-state resource
      * B: another multi-state resource
      * C: regular primitive
   * On startup sequence, when all resources were previously stopped, ensure the following mandatory ordering:
      * A starts, then B
      * A starts, then C
   * After that, if A fails or restarts, do not impact B and C

The docs state that setting the "symmetrical" option to "false" (...symmetrical=false) on the corresponding ordering constraints does the trick.
This works just fine for resource C, but not for resource B.

Is there a restriction I'm not aware of for the multi-state resources with regard to this option? That is the option "symmetrical" doesn't take effect on multi-state resources. Is there something extra that needs to be done/specified for the multi-state resources?

Regards,

Youssef L.