Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 28/02/2016 1:19 PM, "Eric Robinson" <eric.robinson at psmnv.com> wrote: > > > That's exactly what this configuration gives you right? Each group is collocated > > with one and only one drbd device on the master node. Regarding starting/stopping of > > the resources tied up together in the same group. I guess after adding MySQL > > the user case would be: > > >group g_drbd0 p_lvm_drbd0 p_fs_clust17 p_vip_clust17 p_mysql_001 p_mysql_002 ... > > That approach does not really work because if you stop resource p_mysql_002 (for example) then all the other resources in the group stop too! > Still dont understand whats your problem with that. > >> And what was wrong with my constraints? > > You had left the Filesystem out of the picture. > > You're right. I added the filesystem back into the picture and now it works either way, with my original constraints or yours, at least for drbd, lvm, the filesystem, and the VIP. However, it still does not work for the mysql resources. As soon as I add the mysql resources, then when I fail over, everything goes to crap. > > On my other clusters, my constrains look like the following and they work great. I can stop and start any mysql resource without affecting any other resource, but all the mysql resources are still dependent on the underlying ones (drbd, fs, vip). > > Here's a working sample from one of my other clusters... > > colocation c_clust10 inf: ( p_mysql_001 p_mysql_003 p_mysql_043 p_mysql_075 p_mysql_092 ) p_vip_clust10 p_fs_clust10 ms_drbd0:Master > colocation c_clust11 inf: ( p_mysql_124 p_mysql_098 p_mysql_287 p_mysql_346 p_mysql_685 ) p_vip_clust11 p_fs_clust11 ms_drbd1:Master > order o_clust10 inf: ms_drbd0:promote p_fs_clust10 p_vip_clust10 ( p_mysql_001 p_mysql_003 p_mysql_043 p_mysql_075 p_mysql_092 ) > order o_clust11 inf: ms_drbd1:promote p_fs_clust11 p_vip_clust11 ( p_mysql_124 p_mysql_098 p_mysql_287 p_mysql_346 p_mysql_685 ) > > However, that did not work with this newer cluster. It looks like there has been a syntactical change in the CRM. The following approach does work. Note the different usage of parenthesis. > > colocation c_clust17 inf: ( p_mysql_557 p_mysql_690 p_vip_clust17 p_fs_clust17 p_lvm_drbd0 ) ms_drbd0:Master > colocation c_clust18 inf: ( p_vip_clust18 p_fs_clust18 p_lvm_drbd1 ) ms_drbd1:Master > order o_clust17 inf: ms_drbd0:promote ( p_lvm_drbd0:start ) ( p_fs_clust17 p_vip_clust17 ) ( p_mysql_557 p_mysql_690 ) > order o_clust18 inf: ms_drbd1:promote ( p_lvm_drbd1:start ) ( p_fs_clust18 p_vip_clust18 ) > > --Eric -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20160229/b23c7f4e/attachment.htm>