You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwhisk.apache.org by Christian Bickel <ap...@cbickel.de> on 2018/02/13 13:05:03 UTC
Hot standby controller
Hi,
some time ago, we started working on the scale out of the controllers.
One of our first steps was to deploy two controllers, but use the second one as hot standby controller. At this time, this was an important step, because we had to handle cache-invalidation first and solve Load-balancing-issues.
In the meantime all these issues are solved, and the default is that all controllers are used round robin for months now.
We added a flag if the controllers should be used round robin or the second as hot standby. This flag is set to "use all controllers round robin" for months now.
In my opinion, we don't need the hot standby ability anymore.
Does anyone has another opinion?
If not, I'll go forward with the following PR https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266 (https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266) and let it merge.
Greetings
Christian Bickel
Re: Hot standby controller
Posted by 甯尤刚 <ni...@navercorp.com>.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: "Carlos Santana"<cs...@gmail.com>
To: <de...@openwhisk.apache.org>;
Cc:
Sent: 2018-02-14 (星期三) 02:57:05
Subject: Re: Hot standby controller
+1
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:05 AM Christian Bickel <ap...@cbickel.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some time ago, we started working on the scale out of the controllers.
> One of our first steps was to deploy two controllers, but use the second
> one as hot standby controller. At this time, this was an important step,
> because we had to handle cache-invalidation first and solve
> Load-balancing-issues.
> In the meantime all these issues are solved, and the default is that all
> controllers are used round robin for months now.
>
> We added a flag if the controllers should be used round robin or the
> second as hot standby. This flag is set to "use all controllers round
> robin" for months now.
>
> In my opinion, we don't need the hot standby ability anymore.
> Does anyone has another opinion?
>
> If not, I'll go forward with the following PR
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266 (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266) and let it merge.
>
> Greetings
> Christian Bickel
>
Re: Hot standby controller
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:05 AM Christian Bickel <ap...@cbickel.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some time ago, we started working on the scale out of the controllers.
> One of our first steps was to deploy two controllers, but use the second
> one as hot standby controller. At this time, this was an important step,
> because we had to handle cache-invalidation first and solve
> Load-balancing-issues.
> In the meantime all these issues are solved, and the default is that all
> controllers are used round robin for months now.
>
> We added a flag if the controllers should be used round robin or the
> second as hot standby. This flag is set to "use all controllers round
> robin" for months now.
>
> In my opinion, we don't need the hot standby ability anymore.
> Does anyone has another opinion?
>
> If not, I'll go forward with the following PR
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266 (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3266) and let it merge.
>
> Greetings
> Christian Bickel
>