We used to have issues when a load balancer was in front of the sync
endpoints, because our http client didn't time out stalled connections.
Those are resolved in luminous, but we still recommend using the radosgw
addresses directly to avoid shoveling data through an extra proxy.
Internally, sync is already doing a round robin over that list of
endpoints. On the other hand, load balancers give you some extra
flexibility, like adding/removing gateways without having to update the
global multisite configuration.
On 7/16/19 2:52 PM, P. O. wrote:
Hi all,
I have multisite RGW setup with one zonegroup and two zones. Each zone
has one endpoint configured like below:
"zonegroups": [
{
...
"is_master": "true",
"endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";],
"zones": [
{
"name": "primary_1",
"endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";],
},
{
"name": "secondary_1",
"endpoints": ["http://192.168.200.1:80";],
}
],
My question is what is the best practice with configuring
synchronization endpoints?
1) Should endpoints be behind load balancer? For example two
synchronization endpoints per zone, and only load balancers address in
"endpoints" section?
2) Should endpoints be behind Round-robin DNS?
3) Can I set RGWs addresses directly in endpoints section? For example:
"zones": [
{
"name": "primary_1",
"endpoints": ["http://192.168.100.1:80";, http://192.168.100.2:80],
},
{
"name": "secondary_1",
"endpoints": ["http://192.168.200.1:80";, http://192.168.200.2:80],
}
Is there any advantages of third option? I mean speed up of
synchronization, for example.
What recommendations do you have with the configuration of the
endpoints in prod environments?
Best regards,
Dun F.
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
