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

PortOffset 0 on multiple servers #3

Closed
neunhoef opened this issue Feb 24, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

PortOffset 0 on multiple servers #3

neunhoef opened this issue Feb 24, 2017 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@neunhoef
Copy link
Collaborator

A customer wanted to use the starter on Windows (irrelevant here) to setup an ArangoDB cluster on multiple machines. They would prefer it if one could make it so that the same ports are used for starter, agent, coordinator (in particular) and dbserver on all machines. Maybe we can detect this automatically, and if this does not work reliably, there should at least be an option in the starter to override the automatic increment of the portOffset and force it to be zero.

@neunhoef
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Related question: If we allow this, can we migrate a previously started cluster with port offset to one offset zero without a complete reinstall.

@ewoutp
Copy link
Contributor

ewoutp commented Feb 27, 2017

Currently a portOffset is allocated based on the next free offset.
We can change this to the next free portOffset+slaveAddress pair.

However since we can pre-allocate port offsets, and currently a portOffset is only linked to a slave ID, we must forbid that you change the address of a slave after you've pre-allocated a port offset.

Not sure if that leads to new problems.

@ewoutp
Copy link
Contributor

ewoutp commented Feb 27, 2017

The second issue (migrating clusters from one portOffset scheme to another) would require:

  • Different arangodb-starter config files
  • Different arangod server config files
  • Different arangod server system tables (guessing)

To me this sounds like adding a LOT of complexity for a very small edge case.

@neunhoef
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I see, migration is too complex, so we do not support it. I would be in favour of allocating the next free portOffset+slaveAddress pair.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants