On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:40 PM Bin Li (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) < [email protected]> wrote:
> Is it true that both host should have it's own rq in this case? > > If the systems are read only, you don't actually need rq. rq is only used for performing tasks that modify the system. However, you could have pulpcore-workers (rq) on both systems or any additional systems (to increase throughput even more). All pulpcore workers need to use the same settings so that they are connected to the same database and the same instance of redis. We currently don't support clustered redis. > Is it true we don't need add cert on both pulp hosts if we'd like enable > ssl and install cert on load balancer which will forward traffic from 443 > to pulp port 80? > That's right. If you are able to configure your load balancer with similar configs as nginx on your Pulp server, you could remove nginx that's acting as a reverse proxy from your pulp servers and directly forward traffic to ports 24816 (content) and 24817 (rest api). > > From: [email protected] At: 05/13/20 12:28:30 > To: Bin Li (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Pulp-list] pulp 3 live-live setup > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:21 PM Bin Li (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> If we share s3 and external postgres between two pulp host, is it >> possible to have both up for read only purpose behind a load balancer? >> > > Yes, you just want to make sure that the CONTENT_ORIGIN setting reflects > the hostname of the load balancer. > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-list mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list > > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
