<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<font face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">hi guys.<br>
<br>
I had a "partial" cluster electricity power </font><font
face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">hard </font><font
face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">crash - now a resource will not
move:<br>
<br>
-> $ pcs constraint ref MONERO<br>
Resource: MONERO<br>
colocation-MONERO-GATEWAY-NM-link-INFINITY<br>
colocation_set_ceMO<br>
<br>
that '</font><font face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">colocation_set_ceMO'
is quite weird is - is it not? perhaps for @devel to poke at it if
they think it is weird.<br>
...<br>
resource 'MONERO' with resource 'GATEWAY-NM-link' (id:
colocation-MONERO-GATEWAY-NM-link-INFINITY)<br>
score=666<br>
...<br>
Set Constraint: colocation_set_ceMO<br>
score=-1000<br>
Resource Set: colocation_set_ceMO_set<br>
Resources: 'MONERO', 'compute'<br>
...<br>
<br>
_colocation_set_ceMO_ was cluster-created, as opposed to by-human
- I removed it and </font><font face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">MONERO
got moved as expected - why was such constraint cluster-created?<br>
those two are not in any relationship within PCS at all - </font><font
face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">MONERO is systemd service, '</font><font
face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2">compute' is a VM - could such
crash make cluster so subtly & specifically "misbehave"... </font><br>
<font face="Courier 10 Pitch" size="2"><br>
thanks, L.</font>
</body>
</html>