Since you mentioned that you're working on supporting HTTPS health checks
I'm curious if there are any plans to support HTTP/2 over TLS (or even over
plain HTTP). I would think that using HTTP/2 for any communication that
happens in Mesos would provide a nice improvement in heavy load situations.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:59 AM, haosdent <haosd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, dear friends. @alexr and I are working on supporting HTTP(s)/TCP Health
> Check in Mesos.
> We have finished and committed some initial works. But if you use the old
> protobuf definition of
> `HealthCheck` to implement HTTP health check in your custom executor
> before, our changes recently would
> break it.
>
> The change of the protobuf definition of `HealthCheck` is
>
> ```
> message HealthCheck {
> + enum Type {
> + UNKNOWN = 0;
> + COMMAND = 1;
> + HTTP = 2;
> + TCP = 3;
> + }
> +
> - message HTTP {
> + message HTTPCheckInfo {
> + optional string scheme = 1;
> - required uint32 port = 1;
> + required uint32 port = 2;
> - optional string path = 2 [default = "/"];
> + optional string path = 3;
> - repeated uint32 statuses = 4;
> }
> ...
> + optional Type type = 8;
> - // HTTP health check - not yet recommended for use, see MESOS-2533.
> - optional HTTP http = 1;
> + optional HTTPCheckInfo http = 1;
> ...
> }
> ```
>
> Noted that we add a field `type` to specific the health check type and use
> `HTTPCheckInfo` instead of `HTTP`.
> As I know, Mesos didn't support HTTP health check before 1.0 and it is
> supposed to not used.
>
> But thanks to @swsnider to report the issues recently, user may implement
> the custom executor with
> HTTP health check. So I am writing this email to check if anyone
> implemented HTTP health check in custom executor
> like @swsnider and if you depend on the old protobuf definition of
> `HealthCheck` heavily.
> If so, how many month your need for the deprecation cycle of this?
>
> Any concerns and questions are appreciated, thanks a lot!
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Haosdent Huang
>
