Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
This project is now read‑only. Starting Monday, February 2, please use https://ibm-ceph.atlassian.net/ for all bug tracking management.

Bug 1593413

Summary: [Doc RFE] Document how to balance the load across the object gateway servers using HA proxy
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage Reporter: Anjana Suparna Sriram <asriram>
Component: DocumentationAssignee: John Wilkins <jowilkin>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Vidushi Mishra <vimishra>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 3.1CC: agunn, anharris, asriram, bperkins, flucifre, hnallurv, jowilkin, kbader, kdreyer, khartsoe, mbenjamin, uboppana
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: 3.1   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-02-26 07:20:07 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1523244    

Description Anjana Suparna Sriram 2018-06-20 18:40:11 UTC 
User Story: As a storage admin, I want to know how to balance the load across the object gateway servers using HA proxy.
Comment 4 John Wilkins 2018-06-27 20:13:06 UTC 
What's required beyond what we have here: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_ceph_storage/3/html/object_gateway_guide_for_red_hat_enterprise_linux/configuration#haproxy_keepalived_configuration
Comment 8 John Wilkins 2018-08-24 21:47:43 UTC 
I'm working with Kyle Bader kbader to arrive at a procedure. Currently, we are testing with:

https://gist.github.com/mmgaggle/41bcdcd665a455bba9bf277860126c24

Which is a keepalive.d configuration. It will set up the ipvs/lvs automatically. There is a virtual IP address in the configuration too. Hopefully, this will be enough to get QA started. 

Feel free to fail QA. This is for info purposes.
Comment 19 Kyle Bader 2018-08-31 15:09:47 UTC 
I have updated the gist, please give the new configuration a try and let me know if that works.

Thanks,
Comment 21 Kyle Bader 2018-08-31 18:02:03 UTC 
If that works, then fantastic.

If you remove router_id, but leave virtual_router_id, does it work as intended?
Comment 22 Vidushi Mishra 2018-09-03 11:21:49 UTC 
(In reply to Kyle Bader from comment #21)
> If that works, then fantastic.
> 
> If you remove router_id, but leave virtual_router_id, does it work as
> intended?

yeah, it does work without router_id. Only mandate is to set virtual_router_id.