Jeremy’s suggestion could work, but the param would probably be created in a
TR_PROFILE per-CDN. However, that still wouldn’t fix the visibility problem. If
a CDN isn’t using the default “tr” HTTP routing name, operators would still
need to know that there is a new profile parameter that needs updating
post-upgrade but before a snap/queue. So either way there needs to be
sufficient upgrade notes, but personally I still prefer keeping the
routing_name column non-null.
That said, this is my current proposal for the DB migration which also gets us
past the upgrade issue:
1. Add a routing_name column to the DeliveryService table.
2. Update the routing_name for DNS Delivery Services to “edge”.
3. Update the routing_name of non-DNS Delivery Services to the value of a
temporary upgrade parameter associated with the Delivery Service’s CDN (if the
upgrade parameter doesn’t exist, the routing_names will remain null).
4. Update the remaining null routing_names to “tr”.
5. Make the routing_name column non-null and add a non-empty constraint.
So these would be an operator’s pre-upgrade steps:
1. Verify if a custom http.routing.name has been configured for Traffic Routers
in their CDNs.
2. If custom http.routing.name, do the following. Otherwise, no pre-upgrade
steps needed (for per-DS routing names at least):
a. create a parameter named “upgrade_http_routing_name” with the value of
the target CDN’s custom http.routing.name
b. associate this parameter to the TR_PROFILE belonging to the target CDN
c. repeat steps 2a and 2b for each CDN using a custom http.routing.name
This would keep everything working the same post-upgrade as it did pre-upgrade,
and from that point on you’d be able to change a Delivery Service’s routing
name to any arbitrary hostname (without periods).
--Rawlin
On 8/14/17, 4:22 PM, "Dave Neuman" <neu...@apache.org> wrote:
I don't think that solves the issue Rawlin was describing. The issue that
Rawlin was describing is that someone has already defined a different
routing name in traffic_router/http.properties which is no longer going to
be used after the upgrade. The upgrade needs to somehow know about this
other routing name and use that when it creates the database column and
populates it with the pre-defined defaults (edge, tr).
Also, creating a global param doesn't help those with more than 1 CDN.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Jeremy Mitchell <mitchell...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Adding a temp parameter would work but I worry that someone won't read the
> upgrade documentation and forget to create this temporary parameter before
> running the upgrade.
>
> Here's another option.
>
> Create 2 global TO parameters (http.routing.name and dns.routing.name
> <http://http.routing.name/>) that default to tr and edge respectively and
> make the ds.routing_name an optional field.
>
> in seeds.sql
>
> insert into parameter (name, config_file, value) values ('
> http.routing.name',
> 'global', 'tr') ON CONFLICT (name, config_file, value) DO NOTHING;
> insert into parameter (name, config_file, value) values ('dns.routing.name
> ',
> 'global', 'edge') ON CONFLICT (name, config_file, value) DO NOTHING;
>
> in code (warning. ugly pseudo code to follow):
>
> function getRoutingName(ds) {
> return ds.routing_name if not null
> if (ds.type = HTTP) {
> return parameter.http.routing.name
> } else
> return parameter.dns.routing.name
> }
> }
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dave Neuman <neu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Good info Rawlin.
> > My vote would be for a parameter to be used during the upgrade. We can
> set
> > a param called `upgrade_routing_name` or something similiar so that it
is
> > obvious that it is a param used for upgrade only. We should also
> document
> > that A) the param needs to be set before upgrade and B) TR will now
> ignore
> > the setting in the config file. Ideally we would remove the param from
> the
> > default config and the need for the param in the code.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Peters, Rawlin <
> rawlin_pet...@comcast.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > I’ve dug through this a bit more, and defaulting a new
> > > DeliveryService.routing_name
> > > column to ‘tr’ for HTTP delivery services presents an upgrade issue if
> a
> > > CDN has
> > > chosen to use a custom “http.routing.name” parameter for the Traffic
> > > Routers
> > > in that CDN (by editing the http.properties files of the Traffic
> > Routers).
> > >
> > > For instance, if “http.routing.name” has been set to “ccr”, the new
> > > routing name
> > > “tr” will break all of the clients using the old “ccr” delivery
service
> > > URL.
> > >
> > > Basically we need to provide a one-time upgrade step to allow CDNs
> using
> > a
> > > custom
> > > “http.routing.name” to default the new routing_name column to that
> value
> > > for
> > > existing HTTP delivery services. What would be the best way to do
this?
> > > Some options
> > > might be:
> > > 1. Add a profile parameter to the TR_PROFILE for that CDN. On upgrade,
> > > read that
> > > parameter and use it to update the routing_name for existing HTTP
> > > delivery services.
> > > After upgrade, you can safely remove the profile parameter.
> > > 2. Let the upgrade automatically default the routing_name to ‘tr’ or
> > > ‘edge’. After
> > > upgrading, manually update each HTTP delivery service to use the
> > > current
> > > “http.routing.name” in use (we could provide an API endpoint to
> > “bulk
> > > update” the
> > > routing names for all HTTP delivery services in a CDN).
> > >
> > > Note this is not an exhaustive list, this is a just a couple options
> that
> > > have come up in
> > > discussion so far. Feel free to add any more ideas to this list.
> > >
> > > After the upgrade has been completed, the “http.routing.name”
> parameter
> > > in the
> > > Traffic Router’s “http.properties” file will be ignored (same with the
> “
> > > dns.routing.name”
> > > parameter in “dns.properties” which I’m not sure can even be changed
> > > safely today).
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > --Rawlin
> > >
> > > On 8/4/17, 10:19 AM, "Peters, Rawlin" <rawlin_pet...@comcast.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > @Dave @JvD
> > >
> > > Thanks for the feedback. I think I can get on board with
defaulting
> > > the DS columns to ‘edge’ and ‘tr’. I was thinking the CDN columns
might
> > be
> > > useful if the user just wants to set it CDN-wide and not individually
> on
> > > each DS, but I guess if we default it as part of the upgrade
migration,
> > we
> > > should also provide an API endpoint to set the routing names on all
> DSes
> > in
> > > a CDN to a single value, thus still providing a “per-CDN” option.
> Would a
> > > “bulk” update also be useful, in case a user wants to update a handful
> of
> > > DSes to the same routing names at once?
> > >
> > > @JvD Re: TR_PROFILE vs. DS_PROFILE
> > > The default would come from a TR_PROFILE linked to the CDN, and
the
> > > override would come from a DS_PROFILE linked to that specific DS. I
> > looked
> > > into those options to cover all my bases, but I think adding columns
to
> > at
> > > least the DS table and not touching profiles at all is the better
> option.
> > >
> > > -Rawlin
> > >
> > > On 8/4/17, 8:04 AM, "Jan van Doorn" <j...@knutsel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Agree with Dave on
> > >
> > > [*DN] we should default the database column to "edge" for DNS
> and
> > > "tr" for*
> > > *http. Then we don't have to do the null check.*
> > >
> > > If we do that, we can make the columns mandatory, and it makes
> > > sense
> > > they're not in the DS_PROFILE. Also makes it so we don't have
> to
> > > have a CDN
> > > wide setting. (and Rawlin, I think you mean to say DS_PROFILE
> > > rather than
> > > TR_PROFILE type to add the param to if we chose to do that??
Or
> > > was it the
> > > default that goes into TR_PROFILE and the override into
> > > DS_PROFILE?).
> > > In any case - if we make the columns NOT NULL and default them
> to
> > > "tr" and
> > > "edge", I'm +1 on columns in the deliveryservice table.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > JvD
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:12 AM Eric Friedrich (efriedri) <
> > > efrie...@cisco.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey Rawlin-
> > > > Zhilin has also been working on a very similar feature
> which
> > > was
> > > > proposed on this mailer last month:
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> > > 51d7ed1ae65a3697c39edd00236e6f3897da37ef5b24ac452a17cabb@%
> > > 3Cdev.trafficcontrol.apache.org%3E
> > > > <
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> > > 51d7ed1ae65a3697c39edd00236e6f3897da37ef5b24ac452a17cabb@
> > > > <dev.trafficcontrol.apache.org>>
> > > >
> > > > Can you please work him to ensure we don’t duplicate work
and
> > > that if both
> > > > solutions are needed they will work together?
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 3, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Peters, Rawlin <
> > > rawlin_pet...@comcast.com
> > > > <mailto:rawlin_pet...@comcast.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, Outlook converted my numbered list poorly. I’ve
> > corrected
> > > the
> > > > numbering (items 1-3) below.
> > > >
> > > > On 8/3/17, 1:52 PM, "Peters, Rawlin" <
> > rawlin_pet...@comcast.com<
> > > mailto:
> > > > rawlin_pet...@comcast.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello All,
> > > >
> > > > I’ve been working on adding support for configurable
> per-CDN
> > > and
> > > > per-DeliveryService routing names [1] (what are currently
> > > > hardcoded/defaulted to ‘edge’ and ‘tr’ for DNS and HTTP
> > Delivery
> > > Services,
> > > > respectively), and I have a few things to propose.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 1. Add a column to the CDN table for the DNS and HTTP
> > > routing names.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I’ve currently been working off the assumption that
> per-CDN
> > > routing
> > > > names would be configurable by adding ‘http.routing.name’
> and
> > ‘
> > > > dns.routing.name’ parameters to a profile of type TR_PROFILE
> > > using the
> > > > ‘CRConfig.json’ config file. To me this seems like bad UX
> > > because the user
> > > > has to click through multiple steps and fill in multiple
> fields
> > > in the UI
> > > > just to change the CDN’s routing names. It also requires
> > joining
> > > a few
> > > > different tables in the DB just to find the parameters
> per-CDN.
> > > For that
> > > > reason, I think it would be better if ‘dns_routing_name’ and
> > > > ‘http_routing_name’ were added as columns of the ‘cdn’
table,
> > > and changing
> > > > them via the UI would follow the same process as choosing
the
> > > CDN’s domain
> > > > name. Because the routing names would be the CDN-wide
> defaults,
> > > the ‘Edit
> > > > CDN’ window feels like the most natural place to put it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2. Values for per-DeliveryService routing names could
> > live
> > > in one of
> > > > a couple different areas:
> > > > * New columns in the delivery_service table
> > > > * Parameters in a DS Profile
> > > >
> > > > As the developer, my vote would be for Option A because
it
> > > seems like
> > > > it would lead to cleaner code in Traffic Ops because the
> > routing
> > > names
> > > > would be readily-available when handling a DeliveryService.
> You
> > > wouldn’t
> > > > have to also fetch its profile then dig through it to find
> the
> > > routing
> > > > names. A downside could be that adding columns to an
> > > already-overcrowded
> > > > table isn’t ideal.
> > > >
> > > > Option B is less appealing to me but might have some
> > > advantages such as
> > > > keeping the number of columns down in the DeliveryService
> > table.
> > > However,
> > > > DS Profiles currently seem to be geared more towards the
> > > Multi-site Origin
> > > > feature in generating specific ATS configuration
> > (parent.config)
> > > and less
> > > > towards a “junk drawer for optional config”. As the routing
> > > names would
> > > > affect the entire DS and multiple config files, it doesn’t
> seem
> > > right to
> > > > have it as a profile parameter using ‘CRConfig.json’ as the
> > > config file. I
> > > > wasn’t around when DS Profiles were introduced, so if you
are
> > > more familiar
> > > > with their purpose/origin and think this is a good fit for
> > them,
> > > I’d like
> > > > to hear your advice.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 3. If per-DeliveryService routing names are not set
> > > explicitly for a
> > > > DS (i.e. the column is null), then the DS will use the
> per-CDN
> > > routing
> > > > names as a default. If the per-CDN routing names are unset,
> > they
> > > will
> > > > default to the current values of ‘edge’ and ‘tr’. So the
> lookup
> > > hierarchy
> > > > would be DS.routing_names -> CDN.routing_names -> default
> > > ‘edge/tr’.
> > > >
> > > > I’d like to know what you think of these proposals, and
> any
> > > > advice/feedback is welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Rawlin
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC-287
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
