activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:34:29 GMT
First, before I continue.. let me introduce Miroslav to everybody:

Miroslav is a QA engineer at Red Hat for EAP, Messaging and so on, and
to be fair.. he is one of the best I have ever worked with. He is
really good on finding issues.. I have an internal joke that I'm
always afraid when I see a JIRA opened by Mirek. so I really respect
his opinion.

It is great that we are having an open discussion here. and I welcome
you to always be part of open discussions here at the dev list.


So, back to the issue:

I will add an option to add backups to network health check, but I
won't do it by default. You won't always have ICMP open. and I won't
add anything without a third address added. Because losing the backup
would lose the whole live as well (in case of a power outage).

The intent of the PING is to avoid network failures on the box. E.G..
If you pull the cable of the box.

 If you make weird routes to your system, then you are on purpose
splitting your network in such way you don't have how to fix. You need
redundant routes at the system... just like any other networking. (not
to cut them)

The user should know his topology and should always provide IPs that
will be helpful on validating the network. The user also need to
consider his network topology on the solution.

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Miroslav Novak <mnovak@redhat.com> wrote:
> Yes, this could be configurable. I would vote to have this enabled by default as in case
with replicated journal. This will prevent situation where live and backup are active at the
same time. I don't see use for this feature in simple cluster.
>
> It seems that check list cannot contain IP to itself as such address will be always reachable.
>
> Mirek
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Clebert Suconic" <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>> To: dev@activemq.apache.org
>> Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 2:53:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check
>>
>> We can add a few properties to such to control add backup or add other
>> members.
>>
>> I will think about something next week after the holiday.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 3:18 AM Miroslav Novak <mnovak@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> > For this to work properly, the check list of IPs/hostnames must contain
>> > also live/backup pair. I mean that live should have in its checklist IP of
>> > backup and backup of its live server. I think there is problem for the user
>> > to manually add this to the "check list", especially if it's using
>> > discovery - JGroups UDP or Netty UDP discovery - for finding servers. Can
>> > IP/hostnames be added to the checklist automatically? Otherwise this will
>> > be very static. wdyt?
>> >
>> > Mirek
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Clebert Suconic" <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>> > > To: dev@activemq.apache.org
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 5:36:44 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check
>> > >
>> > > I changed the implementation to accept IPV6.
>> > >
>> > > Unfortunately, an IPV6 Address is not returning true through
>> > > isReachable. Perhaps I really need root access fot the ICMP to work on
>> > > IPV6 address.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Anyway, I am testing for IPV6 and using ping6 now on my local copy.. I
>> > > will update the branch before the end of the day, and I should send a
>> > > PR.
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Matt Pavlovich <mattrpav@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > On 11/22/16 9:14 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Matt Pavlovich <mattrpav@gmail.com>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Clebert-
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Can you clarify what you mean by:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> "..the server will shutdown.."
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> the Network Checker will call server.stop();
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The process will stay alive, waiting the network to come back,
when is
>> > > >> back.. it will call server.start() again.
>> > > >
>> > > > Good deal. Sounds good!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Clebert Suconic
>> > >
>> >
>>



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Mime
View raw message