Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RFE: multicluster preview: provide stable pool names for ratio load balancing #3061

Closed
alonsocamaro opened this issue Aug 29, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #3078
Closed

RFE: multicluster preview: provide stable pool names for ratio load balancing #3061

alonsocamaro opened this issue Aug 29, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #3078

Comments

@alonsocamaro
Copy link

alonsocamaro commented Aug 29, 2023

Title

multicluster preview: provide stable pool names

Description

At present the pools are named

<service>_<namespace><_optional>

where the <_optional suffix> is added when the CIS writting the configuration is in the same cluster as the pool.

If there are two clusters and the primary cis is active the pools are named:

guestbook_app1_3000_eng_caas_guestbook_app1
guestbook_app1_3000_eng_caas_guestbook_app1_ocp2

On the other hand if the secondary cis is active the pools are named:

guestbook_app1_3000_eng_caas_guestbook_app1_ocp1
guestbook_app1_3000_eng_caas_guestbook_app1

Actual Problem

This is a problem because scripts, automation and monitoring tools expect consistent naming.

Solution Proposed

Please use always the cluster name as suffix and if required to indicate who wrote the config please put it in the metadata/description of the pool.

Alternatives

A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

Additional context

Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

@trinaths
Copy link
Contributor

Created [CONTCNTR-4143] for internal tracking.

@trinaths trinaths added JIRA and removed untriaged no JIRA created labels Aug 30, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants