[Openstack-operators] Case studies on Openstack HA architecture
serverascode at gmail.com
Mon Aug 28 21:23:40 UTC 2017
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Imtiaz Chowdhury
<imtiaz.chowdhury at workday.com> wrote:
> Hi Openstack operators,
> Most Openstack HA deployment use 3 node database cluster, 3 node rabbitMQ
> cluster and 3 Controllers. I am wondering whether there are any studies done
> that show the pros and cons of co-locating database and messaging service
> with the Openstack control services. In other words, I am very interested
> in learning about advantages and disadvantages, in terms of ease of
> deployment, upgrade and overall API performance, of having 3 all-in-one
> Openstack controller over a more distributed deployment model.
I'm not aware of any actual case studies, but this is the (current)
default model for tripleo and its downstream product, so there would
be a lot of deployments like this out there in the wild. In the
default deployment everything but compute is on these 3 nodes running
on the physical OS.
Do you mean 3 physical servers with everything running on the physical OS?
My opinion is that 3 physical nodes to run all the control plane
services is quite common, but in custom deployments I either run vms
and containers on those or just containers. I'd use at least lxc to
segregate services into their own containers.
I would also suggest that using those same physical servers as
north/south "network nodes" (which you probably don't have as I
believe workday is a big opencontrail user) or hosts for stateful
metric systems (ie. mongodb) can cause issues performance wise, but
co-located mysql/galera and rabbit on the same nodes as the rest of
the openstack control plane hasn't been a problem for me yet, but with
containers I could split them out fairly easily if needed.
> References to any work done in this area will be highly appreciated.
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
More information about the OpenStack-operators