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

Multiple schema registry instances do not support https #386

Open
alexlod opened this Issue Jul 25, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@alexlod
Member

alexlod commented Jul 25, 2016

Currently, if multiple schema registry instances are running, and each is configured with https, the master schema registry will not be able to write to the followers.

The current workaround is to configure each schema registry instance with two listeners, where the first listener is http.

@dodysw

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dodysw

dodysw Aug 21, 2017

This caused confusion why in a cluster of 3, occasionally schema registry returning 500 error the first time a new schema was registered, but eventually "worked" (that seemed to be when the client eventually hit the master schema registry node).

I think is important caveat to mention in the document whenever https, SSL, or certificate part is mentioned, that on multi nodes setup, schema registry must have http as the first listener.

dodysw commented Aug 21, 2017

This caused confusion why in a cluster of 3, occasionally schema registry returning 500 error the first time a new schema was registered, but eventually "worked" (that seemed to be when the client eventually hit the master schema registry node).

I think is important caveat to mention in the document whenever https, SSL, or certificate part is mentioned, that on multi nodes setup, schema registry must have http as the first listener.

@josh-padnick

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@josh-padnick

josh-padnick Jan 4, 2018

It looks like this issue is fixed in #635 and released in v4.0.0, but not any v3.x.x release. If I've understood correctly, this issue should be closed.

josh-padnick commented Jan 4, 2018

It looks like this issue is fixed in #635 and released in v4.0.0, but not any v3.x.x release. If I've understood correctly, this issue should be closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment