[ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Sub‑clusters / super‑clusters?

[Andrei Borzenkov]

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 1:48 PM Antony Stone
<Antony.Stone at ha.open.source.it> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 03 August 2021 at 12:12:03, Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
>
> > Won't something like this work ? Each node in LA will have same score of
> > 5000, while other cities will be -5000.
> >
> > pcs constraint location DummyRes1 rule score=5000 city eq LA
> > pcs constraint location DummyRes1 rule score=-5000 city ne LA
> > stickiness -> 10000
>
> Thanks for the idea, but no difference.
>
> Basically, as soon as zero nodes in one city are available, all resources,
> including those running perfectly at the other city, stop.
>

That is not what you originally said.

You said you have 6 node cluster (3 + 3) and 2 nodes are not available.

If you lose half of nodes and do not have working fencing then this is
expected behavior (in default configuration). You may configure
cluster to keep running resources, but you cannot configure cluster to
take over resources without fencing (well, you can, but ...)

> I'm going to look into booth as suggested by others.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Antony.
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet-making organisation.
>
>                                                    Please reply to the list;
>                                                          please *don't* CC me.
> _______________________________________________
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/