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

[do not merge] Documented installation with HAProxy as a load balancer #1046

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

miminar
Copy link

@miminar miminar commented Oct 6, 2015

Extended advanced install section for HAProxy bits using Ansible.

Modified masters components section acccordingly and added availability
matrix for HAProxy setup.

Depends on openshift-ansible PR#608

@adellape adellape changed the title Documented installation with HAProxy as a load balancer [do not merge] Documented installation with HAProxy as a load balancer Oct 14, 2015
@miminar
Copy link
Author

miminar commented Oct 23, 2015

Ping @smarterclayton for technical review.

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

Looks ok, didn't see anything obviously wrong.

@abutcher
Copy link
Member

@miminar This looks good. I've made a few changes to the inventory variables to differentiate which HA method is being used (native or pacemaker). Take a look at https://github.com/abutcher/openshift-ansible/blob/native-ha/inventory/byo/hosts.example#L54-L73 and let me know if you have any questions / comments / concerns.

Michal Minar added 2 commits October 27, 2015 13:01
Extended advanced install section for HAProxy bits using Ansible.

Modified masters components section acccordingly and added availability
matrix for HAProxy setup.

Signed-off-by: Michal Minar <miminar@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Minar <miminar@redhat.com>
@miminar
Copy link
Author

miminar commented Oct 27, 2015

@abutcher thanks! I've updated config section. Please correct me if I'm wrong: native now describes a way of running discrete API and controllers with any load balancer admin may use. And if Ansible is told to use this method, it will configure HAProxy. Docs will need additional tweaks to reflect this.

@abutcher
Copy link
Member

@miminar That is correct. The native method can be used with any load balancer but it must be pre-configured. An HAProxy instance will be configured for convenience if an lb group is defined.

- native
- pacemaker

Signed-off-by: Michal Minar <miminar@redhat.com>
@miminar
Copy link
Author

miminar commented Nov 2, 2015

@abutcher Thanks for clarification. The text should reflect it now.

@@ -399,12 +399,20 @@ specifications, and save it as *_/etc/ansible/hosts_*.

=== Multiple Masters, Multiple etcd, and Multiple Nodes

There are two high availability methods Ansible supports. `pacemaker` and
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should lead with the native method here something like

There are two high availability methods supported by the advanced installer: native and pacemaker. The former leverages the native HA capabilities built into OpenShift and can be combined with any load balancing solution. HAProxy will be configured as a load balancer if an lb group has been defined in the host inventory. If no lb group is specified, a pre-configured load balancer will be assumed.

The latter method configures Pacemaker, creating a Virtual IP on the active Master...

@abutcher
Copy link
Member

abutcher commented Nov 2, 2015

I was talking with @adellape earlier about separating out the different HA methods into distinct sections to avoid confusing the steps:

  • Single Master
  • Multi-Master + a brief introduction to the supported methods
    • Native
      • Host table
      • Example inventory specific to the native method
      • Possibly include information on how to set up your own load balancer for the master api (masters port 8443 until the port is configurable in the installer)
    • Pacemaker
      • Host table
      • Example inventory specific to the pacemaker method
      • Current Pacemaker details...

@adellape
Copy link
Contributor

adellape commented Nov 2, 2015

@miminar Per Andrew's above comment, I think I'll pull in and build on your work here in another PR to continue to rework those sections of the topic. LMK if you have any issues with that approach.

@abutcher This stuff overall still shouldn't be merged until openshift/openshift-ansible#608 also merges, right?

@abutcher
Copy link
Member

abutcher commented Nov 2, 2015

@adellape Yessir

@miminar
Copy link
Author

miminar commented Nov 3, 2015

@adellape you're free to take over the documentation part. I can focus on testing openshift/openshift-ansible#608.

@adellape
Copy link
Contributor

adellape commented Nov 9, 2015

Closing in favor of #1170.

@adellape adellape closed this Nov 9, 2015
@miminar miminar deleted the haproxy branch August 5, 2016 14:47
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.

None yet

4 participants