Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hawq.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hawq.incubator.apache.org
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:03:50 -0800
From: Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
To: dev@hawq.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: ssh'ing around the cluster
Message-ID: <20160226050350.GY24478@tpx>
Mail-Followup-To: dev@hawq.incubator.apache.org
References: <20160226014020.GT24478@tpx>
 <CAE44UQehN9dmKA1Mpyr_6QWgvh4cgQLPpKnh6eaJj29fV=hsYQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAE44UQehN9dmKA1Mpyr_6QWgvh4cgQLPpKnh6eaJj29fV=hsYQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:53AM, Lei Chang wrote:
> Hi Konstantin,
>=20
> If I understand correctly, what you requested is in current hawq code bas=
e.
> To init hawq, "hawq init cluster" is one way, you can also use "hawq init
> master" and "hawq init segment" on all cluster nodes. Master and segments
> are decoupled in 2.0.

Ah, nice. Let me try that. Thanks!

>=20
> Cheers
> Lei
>=20
>=20
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org> wrot=
e:
>=20
> > Guys,
> >
> > more revelations about the way Hawq is designed to work with the service
> > bootstraps, config management, and so on. Looking into hawq_ctl and
> > observing
> > the behavior of 'hawq init cluster' I see that a number of operations is
> > intended to be initiated from presumably, a master node, and carried on=
 all
> > the nodes of a hawq cluster via the means or ssh (or rsync). While doin=
g so
> > might be a convenient shortcut for the development environment, it isn'=
t as
> > much in a real deployment. For one, it requires password-less SSH access
> > between nodes, which isn't (generally speaking) how data centers might
> > operate.
> >
> > Perhaps a better way of separating the concerns here is to have isolated
> > functions to perform only local-node operations, and a wrapper to run t=
he
> > same
> > functionality on the all remote nodes, via ssh or else. If such split is
> > done,
> > then an orchestration mechanism (such as a state machine similar to Pup=
pet
> > or
> > Chef), would execute the scripts on separate nodes in full isolation. A=
nd
> > if
> > so desired in a dev environment, the current functionality would be
> > available
> > as well.
> >
> > Thoughts? Regards,
> >   Cos
> >

--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlbP3LYACgkQenyFlstYjhK3ogEAtKsgAxp4qDFa/VnHg4W/kXQv
Bz310bGwsI2cM9mbazcA/2BT8JZUYWESpz3tPxSNPwx5UeuqsAVMv/446lA1UVjS
=yDmK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--G5yIW5EaChZ5gJdA--