Hi,
Is there any mechanism inside the rgw that can detect faulty endpoints for
a configuration with multiple endpoints?
Is there any advantage related with the number of replication endpoints?
Can I expect improved replication performance (the more synchronization
rgws = the faster replication)?
W dniu środa, 17 lipca 2019 P. O. <pos...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> Hi,
>
>
> Is there any mechanism inside the rgw that can detect faulty endpoints for a
> configuration with multiple endpoints?
>
> Is there any advantage related with the number of replication endpoints? Can
> I expect improved replication performance (the more synchronization rgws =
> the faster replication)?
>
>
> W dniu wtorek, 16 lipca 2019 Casey Bodley <cbod...@redhat.com> napisał(a):
>
>> We used to have issues when a load balancer was in front of the sync
>> endpoints, because our http client didn't time out stalled connections.
>> Those are resolved in luminous, but we still recommend using the radosgw
>> addresses directly to avoid shoveling data through an extra proxy.
>> Internally, sync is already doing a round robin over that list of
>> endpoints. On the other hand, load balancers give you some extra
>> flexibility, like adding/removing gateways without having to update the
>> global multisite configuration.
>>
>> On 7/16/19 2:52 PM, P. O. wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have multisite RGW setup with one zonegroup and two zones. Each zone
>>> has one endpoint configured like below:
>>>
>>> "zonegroups": [
>>> {
>>> ...
>>> "is_master": "true",
>>> "endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";],
>>> "zones": [
>>> {
>>> "name": "primary_1",
>>> "endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";],
>>> },
>>> {
>>> "name": "secondary_1",
>>> "endpoints": ["http://192.168.200.1:80";],
>>> }
>>> ],
>>>
>>> My question is what is the best practice with configuring
>>> synchronization endpoints?
>>>
>>> 1) Should endpoints be behind load balancer? For example two
>>> synchronization endpoints per zone, and only load balancers address in
>>> "endpoints" section?
>>> 2) Should endpoints be behind Round-robin DNS?
>>> 3) Can I set RGWs addresses directly in endpoints section? For example:
>>>
>>> "zones": [
>>> {
>>> "name": "primary_1",
>>> "endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";, http://192.168.100.2:80],
>>> },
>>> {
>>> "name": "secondary_1",
>>> "endpoints": ["http://192.168.200.1:80";, http://192.168.200.2:80],
>>> }
>>>
>>> Is there any advantages of third option? I mean speed up of
>>> synchronization, for example.
>>>
>>> What recommendations do you have with the configuration of the endpoints
>>> in prod environments?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Dun F.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ceph-users mailing list
>>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ceph-users mailing list
>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>>
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
