Open Stack

Hey,
I am talking about that:
https://www.rabbitmq.com/ae.html

Cheers,

-- 
Arnaud Morin

On 21.08.20 - 09:06, Fabian Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> don't understand what you mean with "alternate exchange"? I'm doing
> all my tests on my DEV-Env? It's a completely separated / dedicated
> (virtual) cluster.
> 
> I just enabled the feature and wrote a small script to read the
> metrics from the api.
> 
> I'm having some "dropped msg" in my cluster, just trying to figure out
> if they are "normal".
> 
>  Fabian
> 
> Am Do., 20. Aug. 2020 um 21:28 Uhr schrieb Arnaud MORIN
> <arnaud.morin at gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hello,
> > Are you doing that using alternate exchange ?
> > I started configuring it in our env but not yet finished.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Le jeu. 20 août 2020 à 19:16, Fabian Zimmermann <dev.faz at gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> just another idea:
> >>
> >> Rabbitmq is able to count undelivered messages. We could use this information to detect the broken bindings (causing undeliverable messages).
> >>
> >> Anyone already doing this?
> >>
> >> I currently don't have a way to reproduce the broken bindings, so I'm unable to proof the idea.
> >>
> >> Seems we have to wait issue to happen again - what - hopefully - never happens :)
> >>
> >>  Fabian
> >>
> >> Arnaud Morin <arnaud.morin at gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 18. Aug. 2020, 14:07:
> >>>
> >>> Hey all,
> >>>
> >>> About the vexxhost strategy to use only one rabbit server and manage HA through
> >>> rabbit.
> >>> Do you plan to do the same for MariaDB/MySQL?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Arnaud Morin
> >>>
> >>> On 14.08.20 - 18:45, Fabian Zimmermann wrote:
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> >
> >>> > i read somewhere that vexxhosts kubernetes openstack-Operator is running
> >>> > one rabbitmq Container per Service. Just the kubernetes self healing is
> >>> > used as "ha" for rabbitmq.
> >>> >
> >>> > That seems to match with my finding: run rabbitmq standalone and use an
> >>> > external system to restart rabbitmq if required.
> >>> >
> >>> >  Fabian
> >>> >
> >>> > Satish Patel <satish.txt at gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 14. Aug. 2020, 16:59:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Fabian,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > what do you mean?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > >> I think vexxhost is running (1) with their openstack-operator - for
> >>> > > reasons.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 7:28 AM Fabian Zimmermann <dev.faz at gmail.com>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hello again,
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > just a short update about the results of my tests.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I currently see 2 ways of running openstack+rabbitmq
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > 1. without durable-queues and without replication - just one
> >>> > > rabbitmq-process which gets (somehow) restarted if it fails.
> >>> > > > 2. durable-queues and replication
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Any other combination of these settings leads to more or less issues with
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > * broken / non working bindings
> >>> > > > * broken queues
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I think vexxhost is running (1) with their openstack-operator - for
> >>> > > reasons.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > I added [kolla], because kolla-ansible is installing rabbitmq with
> >>> > > replication but without durable-queues.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > May someone point me to the best way to document these findings to some
> >>> > > official doc?
> >>> > > > I think a lot of installations out there will run into issues if - under
> >>> > > load - a node fails.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >  Fabian
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Am Do., 13. Aug. 2020 um 15:13 Uhr schrieb Fabian Zimmermann <
> >>> > > dev.faz at gmail.com>:
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> Hi,
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> just did some short tests today in our test-environment (without
> >>> > > durable queues and without replication):
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> * started a rally task to generate some load
> >>> > > >> * kill-9-ed rabbitmq on one node
> >>> > > >> * rally task immediately stopped and the cloud (mostly) stopped working
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> after some debugging i found (again) exchanges which had bindings to
> >>> > > queues, but these bindings didnt forward any msgs.
> >>> > > >> Wrote a small script to detect these broken bindings and will now check
> >>> > > if this is "reproducible"
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> then I will try "durable queues" and "durable queues with replication"
> >>> > > to see if this helps. Even if I would expect
> >>> > > >> rabbitmq should be able to handle this without these "hidden broken
> >>> > > bindings"
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> This just FYI.
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >>  Fabian
> >>> > >