6.6. Collocating Sets of Resources

Another common situation is for an administrator to create a set of collocated resources. Previously this possible either by defining a resource group (See Section 10.1, “Groups - A Syntactic Shortcut”) which could not always accurately express the design; or by defining each relationship as an individual constraint, causing a constraint explosion as the number of resources and combinations grew.

Example 6.13. A chain of collocated resources


  <constraints>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-1" rsc="B" with-rsc="A" score="INFINITY"/>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-2" rsc="C" with-rsc="B" score="INFINITY"/>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-3" rsc="D" with-rsc="C" score="INFINITY"/>
  </constraints>

To make things easier, we allow an alternate form of colocation constraints using resource_sets. Just like the expanded version, a resource that can't be active also prevents any resource that must be collocated with it from being active. For example if B was not able to run, then both C (and by inference D) must also remain stopped.

Example 6.14. The equivalent colocation chain expressed using resource_sets


  <constraints>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-1" score="INFINITY" >
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-example" sequential="true">
        <resource_ref id="A"/>
        <resource_ref id="B"/>
        <resource_ref id="C"/>
        <resource_ref id="D"/>
      </resource_set>
    </rsc_colocation>
  </constraints>

Note

Resource sets have the same colocation semantics as groups.

Example 6.15. A group resource with the equivalent colocation rules


  <group id="dummy">
    <primitive id="A" .../>
    <primitive id="B" .../>
    <primitive id="C" .../>
    <primitive id="D" .../>
  </group>

This notation can also be used in this context to tell the cluster that a set of resources must all be located with a common peer, but have no dependencies on each other. In this scenario, unlike the previous on, B would be allowed to remain active even if A or C (or both) were inactive.

Example 6.16. Using colocation sets to specify a common peer.


  <constraints>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-1" score="INFINITY" >
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-1" sequential="false">
        <resource_ref id="A"/>
        <resource_ref id="B"/>
        <resource_ref id="C"/>
      </resource_set>
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-2" sequential="true">
        <resource_ref id="D"/>
      </resource_set>
    </rsc_colocation>
  </constraints>

Of course there is no limit to the number and size of the sets used. The only thing that matters is that in order for any member of set N to be active, all the members of set N+1 must also be active (and naturally on the same node), and that if a set has sequential="true", then in order for member M to be active, member M+1 must also be active. You can even specify the role in which the members of a set must be in using the set's role attribute.

Example 6.17. A colocation chain where the members of the middle set have no inter-dependencies and the last has master status.


  <constraints>
    <rsc_colocation id="coloc-1" score="INFINITY" >
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-1" sequential="true">
        <resource_ref id="A"/>
        <resource_ref id="B"/>
      </resource_set>
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-2" sequential="false">
        <resource_ref id="C"/>
        <resource_ref id="D"/>
        <resource_ref id="E"/>
      </resource_set>
      <resource_set id="collocated-set-2" sequential="true" role="Master">
        <resource_ref id="F"/>
        <resource_ref id="G"/>
      </resource_set>
    </rsc_colocation>
  </constraints>

Visual representation of a colocation chain where the members of the middle set have no inter-dependencies