We are probably going to just have a VM startup script for now that automatically updates the yaml on instance restart. It seems to be the least-sucky approach at this point.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 12:36 PM Carl Mueller <carl.muel...@smartthings.com> wrote: > I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15068 > > EIPs per the aws experts cost money, are limited in resources (we have a > lot of VMs) and cause a lot of headaches in our autoscaling / > infrastructure as code systems. > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 12:35 PM Carl Mueller < > carl.muel...@smartthings.com> wrote: > >> I'll try to get a replicated error message, but it was along the lines of >> what is in the gossip strategy agnostic description in cassandra.yaml >> comments of what happens when you set rpc_address to 0.0.0.0: you must >> then set broadcast_rpc_address. >> >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 3:21 AM Oleksandr Shulgin < >> oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:28 PM Carl Mueller >>> <carl.muel...@smartthings.com.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> - the AWS people say EIPs are a PITA. >>>> >>> >>> Why? >>> >>> >>>> - if we hardcode the global IPs in the yaml, then yaml editing is >>>> required for the occaisional hard instance reboot in aws and its attendant >>>> global ip reassignment >>>> - if we try leaving broadcast_rpc_address blank, null , or commented >>>> out with rpc_address set to 0.0.0.0 then cassandra refuses to start >>>> >>> >>> Yeah, that's not nice. >>> >>> - if we take out rpc_address and broadcast_rpc_address, then cqlsh >>>> doesn't work with localhost anymore and that fucks up some of our cluster >>>> managemetn tooling >>>> >>>> - we kind of are being lazy and just want what worked in 2.1 to work in >>>> 2.2 >>>> >>> >>> Makes total sense to me. >>> >>> I'll try to track down where cassandra startup is complaining to us >>>> about rpc_address: 0.0.0.0 and broadcast_rpc_address being >>>> blank/null/commented out. That section of code may need an exception for >>>> EC2MRS. >>>> >>> >>> It sounds like this check is done before instantiating the snitch and it >>> should be other way round, so that the snitch can have a chance to adjust >>> the configuration before it's checked for correctness. Do you have the >>> exact error message with which it complains? >>> >>> -- >>> Alex >>> >>>
