Skip to content

Feature.active standby cluster#472

Merged
zancas merged 3 commits intoF5Networks:developmentfrom
pjbreaux:feature.active_standby_cluster
Jun 3, 2016
Merged

Feature.active standby cluster#472
zancas merged 3 commits intoF5Networks:developmentfrom
pjbreaux:feature.active_standby_cluster

Conversation

@pjbreaux
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pjbreaux pjbreaux commented Jun 1, 2016

@zancas

What's this change do?

Improves documentation and code for supporting an active standby cluster.

Any background context?

After talking to jgruber, I realized that having a four-member cluster isn't terribly useful because you still have to manually manage traffic groups. Without this traffic group feature, only an active standby cluster is useful because it uses one traffic group to manage traffic.

Where should the reviewer start?

Start at the new unit tests and then move to the functional tests. The four-member tests have been removed, since testing against two devices is easier than having four running.

@zancas
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

zancas commented Jun 2, 2016

Some checks failing...

@zancas zancas modified the milestone: v0.1.7 Jun 2, 2016
@pjbreaux pjbreaux force-pushed the feature.active_standby_cluster branch from 5bdaab9 to 7745146 Compare June 2, 2016 14:35
@pjbreaux
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

pjbreaux commented Jun 2, 2016

Travis looks good. Jenkins is not.

@caphrim007
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pjbreaux re-triggering the build here

@caphrim007 caphrim007 closed this Jun 2, 2016
@caphrim007 caphrim007 reopened this Jun 2, 2016
@zancas
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

zancas commented Jun 2, 2016

@pjbreaux please sync your development branch with origin and rebase on top of it.

@caphrim007
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pjbreaux why were the scale up/downs removed?

@pjbreaux
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

pjbreaux commented Jun 2, 2016

A few reasons. Adding a device causes a failover event. Also, as I understand it, having more than two devices usually requires multiple traffic groups meaning we would have to manage those for multiple devices as well as manage their fallbacks. We will add it eventually.

@caphrim007
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@smooth-alg see @pjbreaux 's response

@pjbreaux
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

pjbreaux commented Jun 2, 2016

I'd love to discuss with anyone curious. At least getting requirements around clustering for more than two devices.

Paul Breaux added 3 commits June 3, 2016 15:56
Issues:
Fixes F5Networks#456 and F5Networks#460

Problem:
Developers must be able to opt-in to the cluster tests, since they
require a set of at least four bigip devices.

Also, a trust domain is implemented as a device group on the bigip
devices, and we must be able to sync that group when we add members to
the trust domain.

Analysis:
Used pytest.mark.skip to skip cluster tests unless a user has set a key
of 'run_cluster_tests' and a value of JSON/YAML truthiness.

The trust domain now instantiates a device group manager to sync to that
group when adding devices to the trust domain. This is a part of the
validation process in the device group and the trust domain.

Tests:
All unit and functional tests pass
Issues:
Fixes F5Networks#471

Problem:
In order to minimize feature creep and the ability for users to shoot
themselves in the foot, I would like to limit clustering support to
handle only two devices. This will be reflected in the code with tests
and documentation.

Analysis:
Modified the code to only allow up to four devices to be clustered, yet the
functional tests are there for up to two devices. Four devices is not yet
supported. This will be made clear in the customer-facing documentation.
It is already clear in the code documentation.

Tests:
All clustering tests pass against 11.6 and 12.0 VE images
@pjbreaux pjbreaux force-pushed the feature.active_standby_cluster branch from 08cfe9b to a84e898 Compare June 3, 2016 21:58
@zancas zancas merged commit a03cb7c into F5Networks:development Jun 3, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants