Well, if it is broken and it is not prominently mentioned anywhere new adopters may go ahead with that on production. So I guess best to remove or at least mention that it is not production grade.
Thanks Shiv > On 22-Aug-2023, at 20:12, Nux <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > > But what do you think of the removal of DB HA code? > > When using Galera you need to query against a single node, don't spread the > load among all 3, as this will break certain locking functionality in > Cloudstack and lead to problems. > > In a Haproxy configuration you should be keeping just one active, eg: > server galera1 10.0.3.2:3306 check > server galera2 10.0.3.3:3306 check backup > server galera3 10.0.3.4:3306 check backup > > Regards > > On 2023-08-22 15:36, K B Shiv Kumar wrote: >> We faced some issues when running Galera. We went back to master slave. >> Anyone using Galera in production for a long time? >> Regards, >> Shiv >>> On 22-Aug-2023, at 19:34, Nux <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: >>> Happy to contribute a doc on how to achieve HA if we decide to remove this. >>> Thanks >>> On 2023-08-22 15:01, Rohit Yadav wrote: >>>> +1 it's a broken feature that at least doesn't work with MySQL 8.x, I'm >>>> not sure if it worked with prior versions of MySQL. However, we need to >>>> document some sort of suggested MySQL HA setup in our docs. >>>> Regards. >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Nux <n...@li.nux.ro> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 18:54 >>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org <users@cloudstack.apache.org>; Dev >>>> <d...@cloudstack.apache.org> >>>> Subject: [Consultation] Remove DB HA feature (db.ha.enabled) >>>> Hello everyone, >>>> A few weeks ago I asked you if you use or managed to use the DB HA >>>> Cloudstack feature (db.ha.enabled)[1] and after reading some of the >>>> replies and doing intensive testing myself I have found out that the >>>> feature is indeed non-functional, it's broken. >>>> In my testing I discovered DB HA can easily be done outside of >>>> Cloudstack by employing load balancers and other techniques. >>>> Personally I have achieved that by using Haproxy in front of Galera >>>> cluster, but also introduced Keepalived (vrrp) in my setup to "balance" >>>> multiple Haproxies which also worked well. >>>> As such, since the feature is basically broken, it will not be trivial >>>> to fix it and there are better ways of doing HA, then I propose to >>>> remove it altogether. >>>> Thoughts? Anyone against it? >>>> Cheers >>>> [1] - >>>> https://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/adminguide/reliability.html#database-high-availability -- This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of viruses.
