cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nux! <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] VR upgrade downtime reduction
Date Wed, 07 Feb 2018 11:17:13 GMT
+1 too

Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!


----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rene Moser" <>
> To: "dev" <>
> Sent: Wednesday, 7 February, 2018 10:11:45
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] VR upgrade downtime reduction

> On 02/06/2018 02:47 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote:
>> Hi Daan,
>> In my opinion the biggest issue is the fact that there are a lot of different
>> code paths: VPC versus non-VPC, VPC versus redundant-VPC, etc. That's why you
>> cannot simply switch from a single VPC to a redundant VPC for example.
>> For SBP, we mitigated that in Cosmic by converting all non-VPCs to a VPC with a
>> single tier and made sure all features are supported. Next we merged the single
>> and redundant VPC code paths. The idea here is that redundancy or not should
>> only be a difference in the number of routers. Code should be the same. A
>> single router, is also "master" but there just is no "backup".
>> That simplifies things A LOT, as keepalived is now the master of the whole
>> thing. No more assigning ip addresses in Python, but leave that to keepalived
>> instead. Lots of code deleted. Easier to maintain, way more stable. We just
>> released Cosmic 6 that has this feature and are now rolling it out in
>> production. Looking good so far. This change unlocks a lot of possibilities,
>> like live upgrading from a single VPC to a redundant one (and back). In the
>> end, if the redundant VPC is rock solid, you most likely don't even want single
>> VPCs any more. But that will come.
>> As I said, we're rolling this out as we speak. In a few weeks when everything is
>> upgraded I can share what we learned and how well it works. CloudStack could
>> use a similar approach.
> +1 Pretty much this.
> René

View raw message