You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@mesos.apache.org by haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> on 2016/09/02 14:59:20 UTC

Support HTTP(s)/TCP Health Check in Mesos

Hi, dear friends. @alexr and I are working on supporting HTTP(s)/TCP Health
Check in Mesos.
We have finished and committed some initial works. But if you use the old
protobuf definition of
`HealthCheck` to implement HTTP health check in your custom executor
before, our changes recently would
break it.

The change of the protobuf definition of `HealthCheck` is

```
 message HealthCheck {
 +  enum Type {
 +    UNKNOWN = 0;
 +    COMMAND = 1;
 +    HTTP = 2;
 +    TCP = 3;
 +  }
 +
 -  message HTTP {
 +  message HTTPCheckInfo {
 +    optional string scheme = 1;
 -    required uint32 port = 1;
 +    required uint32 port = 2;
 -    optional string path = 2 [default = "/"];
 +    optional string path = 3;
 -    repeated uint32 statuses = 4;
    }
...
 +  optional Type type = 8;
 -  // HTTP health check - not yet recommended for use, see MESOS-2533.
 -  optional HTTP http = 1;
 +  optional HTTPCheckInfo http = 1;
...
  }
```

Noted that we add a field `type` to specific the health check type and use
`HTTPCheckInfo` instead of `HTTP`.
As I know, Mesos didn't support HTTP health check before 1.0 and it is
supposed to not used.

But thanks to @swsnider to report the issues recently, user may implement
the custom executor with
HTTP health check. So I am writing this email to check if anyone
implemented HTTP health check in custom executor
like @swsnider and if you depend on the old protobuf definition of
`HealthCheck` heavily.
If so, how many month your need for the deprecation cycle of this?

Any concerns and questions are appreciated, thanks a lot!

-- 
Best Regards,
Haosdent Huang

Re: Support HTTP(s)/TCP Health Check in Mesos

Posted by Aaron Wood <aa...@gmail.com>.

Sure! I'll open one. Sorry to hijack :) Will send separate emails about
this going forward.

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Alex Rukletsov <al...@mesosphere.com> wrote:

> Aaron—
>
> we do use some on Boost libraries.
>
> I think supporting HTTP/2 is a great idea and we should definitely create a
> JIRA epic to evaluate and track work. My intuition we will have to
> implement it ourselves in libprocess. Would you like to open a ticket?
>
> However, let's not hijack this thread for this : ).
>
> Everyone, are there any Mesos users with custom executors which use HTTP
> part of HealthCheck protobuf?
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Aaron Wood <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's great!
> >
> > I would be interested in seeing support for HTTP/2 as I think the
> benefits
> > of header compression and connection multiplexing could provide some nice
> > improvements in certain environments.
> >
> > What do you (or anyone else here) think about this? There's no use of
> Boost
> > anywhere in this project, right? I'm not sure what good libraries there
> are
> > to provide this for C++ 11.
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:46 PM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Just test with curl 7.50.1, HTTP 2 is supported.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:32 AM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The current implementation of HTTP(s) health check is based on curl.
> > > > According to the document of curl
> > > >
> > > > >Since 7.47.0, the curl tool enables HTTP/2 by default for HTTPS
> > > > connections.
> > > >
> > > > So I think it should be supported if the curl version in your Mesos
> > Agent
> > > > is higher that 7.47. But I have not yet try this.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Aaron Wood <aa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Since you mentioned that you're working on supporting HTTPS health
> > > checks
> > > >> I'm curious if there are any plans to support HTTP/2 over TLS (or
> even
> > > >> over
> > > >> plain HTTP). I would think that using HTTP/2 for any communication
> > that
> > > >> happens in Mesos would provide a nice improvement in heavy load
> > > >> situations.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:59 AM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi, dear friends. @alexr and I are working on supporting
> HTTP(s)/TCP
> > > >> Health
> > > >> > Check in Mesos.
> > > >> > We have finished and committed some initial works. But if you use
> > the
> > > >> old
> > > >> > protobuf definition of
> > > >> > `HealthCheck` to implement HTTP health check in your custom
> executor
> > > >> > before, our changes recently would
> > > >> > break it.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The change of the protobuf definition of `HealthCheck` is
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ```
> > > >> >  message HealthCheck {
> > > >> >  +  enum Type {
> > > >> >  +    UNKNOWN = 0;
> > > >> >  +    COMMAND = 1;
> > > >> >  +    HTTP = 2;
> > > >> >  +    TCP = 3;
> > > >> >  +  }
> > > >> >  +
> > > >> >  -  message HTTP {
> > > >> >  +  message HTTPCheckInfo {
> > > >> >  +    optional string scheme = 1;
> > > >> >  -    required uint32 port = 1;
> > > >> >  +    required uint32 port = 2;
> > > >> >  -    optional string path = 2 [default = "/"];
> > > >> >  +    optional string path = 3;
> > > >> >  -    repeated uint32 statuses = 4;
> > > >> >     }
> > > >> > ...
> > > >> >  +  optional Type type = 8;
> > > >> >  -  // HTTP health check - not yet recommended for use, see
> > > MESOS-2533.
> > > >> >  -  optional HTTP http = 1;
> > > >> >  +  optional HTTPCheckInfo http = 1;
> > > >> > ...
> > > >> >   }
> > > >> > ```
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Noted that we add a field `type` to specific the health check type
> > and
> > > >> use
> > > >> > `HTTPCheckInfo` instead of `HTTP`.
> > > >> > As I know, Mesos didn't support HTTP health check before 1.0 and
> it
> > is
> > > >> > supposed to not used.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > But thanks to @swsnider to report the issues recently, user may
> > > >> implement
> > > >> > the custom executor with
> > > >> > HTTP health check. So I am writing this email to check if anyone
> > > >> > implemented HTTP health check in custom executor
> > > >> > like @swsnider and if you depend on the old protobuf definition of
> > > >> > `HealthCheck` heavily.
> > > >> > If so, how many month your need for the deprecation cycle of this?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Any concerns and questions are appreciated, thanks a lot!
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Best Regards,
> > > >> > Haosdent Huang
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Haosdent Huang
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Haosdent Huang
> > >
> >
>

Re: Support HTTP(s)/TCP Health Check in Mesos

Posted by Alex Rukletsov <al...@mesosphere.com>.

Aaron—

we do use some on Boost libraries.

I think supporting HTTP/2 is a great idea and we should definitely create a
JIRA epic to evaluate and track work. My intuition we will have to
implement it ourselves in libprocess. Would you like to open a ticket?

However, let's not hijack this thread for this : ).

Everyone, are there any Mesos users with custom executors which use HTTP
part of HealthCheck protobuf?


On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Aaron Wood <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's great!
>
> I would be interested in seeing support for HTTP/2 as I think the benefits
> of header compression and connection multiplexing could provide some nice
> improvements in certain environments.
>
> What do you (or anyone else here) think about this? There's no use of Boost
> anywhere in this project, right? I'm not sure what good libraries there are
> to provide this for C++ 11.
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:46 PM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just test with curl 7.50.1, HTTP 2 is supported.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:32 AM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The current implementation of HTTP(s) health check is based on curl.
> > > According to the document of curl
> > >
> > > >Since 7.47.0, the curl tool enables HTTP/2 by default for HTTPS
> > > connections.
> > >
> > > So I think it should be supported if the curl version in your Mesos
> Agent
> > > is higher that 7.47. But I have not yet try this.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Aaron Wood <aa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Since you mentioned that you're working on supporting HTTPS health
> > checks
> > >> I'm curious if there are any plans to support HTTP/2 over TLS (or even
> > >> over
> > >> plain HTTP). I would think that using HTTP/2 for any communication
> that
> > >> happens in Mesos would provide a nice improvement in heavy load
> > >> situations.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:59 AM, haosdent <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi, dear friends. @alexr and I are working on supporting HTTP(s)/TCP
> > >> Health
> > >> > Check in Mesos.
> > >> > We have finished and committed some initial works. But if you use
> the
> > >> old
> > >> > protobuf definition of
> > >> > `HealthCheck` to implement HTTP health check in your custom executor
> > >> > before, our changes recently would
> > >> > break it.
> > >> >
> > >> > The change of the protobuf definition of `HealthCheck` is
> > >> >
> > >> > ```
> > >> >  message HealthCheck {
> > >> >  +  enum Type {
> > >> >  +    UNKNOWN = 0;
> > >> >  +    COMMAND = 1;
> > >> >  +    HTTP = 2;
> > >> >  +    TCP = 3;
> > >> >  +  }
> > >> >  +
> > >> >  -  message HTTP {
> > >> >  +  message HTTPCheckInfo {
> > >> >  +    optional string scheme = 1;
> > >> >  -    required uint32 port = 1;
> > >> >  +    required uint32 port = 2;
> > >> >  -    optional string path = 2 [default = "/"];
> > >> >  +    optional string path = 3;
> > >> >  -    repeated uint32 statuses = 4;
> > >> >     }
> > >> > ...
> > >> >  +  optional Type type = 8;
> > >> >  -  // HTTP health check - not yet recommended for use, see
> > MESOS-2533.
> > >> >  -  optional HTTP http = 1;
> > >> >  +  optional HTTPCheckInfo http = 1;
> > >> > ...
> > >> >   }
> > >> > ```
> > >> >
> > >> > Noted that we add a field `type` to specific the health check type
> and
> > >> use
> > >> > `HTTPCheckInfo` instead of `HTTP`.
> > >> > As I know, Mesos didn't support HTTP health check before 1.0 and it
> is
> > >> > supposed to not used.
> > >> >
> > >> > But thanks to @swsnider to report the issues recently, user may
> > >> implement
> > >> > the custom executor with
> > >> > HTTP health check. So I am writing this email to check if anyone
> > >> > implemented HTTP health check in custom executor
> > >> > like @swsnider and if you depend on the old protobuf definition of
> > >> > `HealthCheck` heavily.
> > >> > If so, how many month your need for the deprecation cycle of this?
> > >> >
> > >> > Any concerns and questions are appreciated, thanks a lot!
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Best Regards,
> > >> > Haosdent Huang
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Haosdent Huang
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Haosdent Huang
> >
>