[ClusterLabs] Q: Resource Groups vs Resources for stickiness and colocation?

[Ian Underhill]

im guessing this is just a "feature", but something that will probably stop
me using groups

Scenario1 (working):
1) Two nodes (1,2) within a cluster (default-stickiness = INFINITY)
2) Two resources (A,B) in a cluster running on different nodes
3) colocation constraint between resources of A->B score=-1

a) pcs standby node2, the resource B moves to node 1
b) pcs unstandby node2, the resource B stays on node 1 - this is good and
expected

Secanrio 2 (working):
1) exactly the same as above but the resource exist within their own group
(G1,G2)
2) the colocation constraint is between the groups

Secanrio 3 (not working):
1) Same as above however each group has two resources in them

 Resource Group: A_grp
     A (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03
     A_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl03
 Resource Group: B_grp
     B (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11
     B_2 (ocf::test:fallover): Started mac-devl11

a) pcs standby node2, the group moves to node 1
b) pcs unstandby node2, the group moves to node 2, but I have INFINITY
stickiness (maybe I need INFINITY+1 ;) )????

crm_simulate -sL doesnt really explain why there is a difference.

any ideas?  (environment pacemaker-cluster-libs-1.1.16-12.el7.x86_64)

/Ian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20180829/797a3a64/attachment.html>