On 29 April 2017 at 01:46, Mike Dorman <mdor...@godaddy.com> wrote: > I don’t disagree with you that the client side choose-a-server-at-random is > not a great load balancer. (But isn’t this roughly the same thing that > oslo-messaging does when we give it a list of RMQ servers?) For us it’s more > about the failure handling if one is down than it is about actually equally > distributing the load.
Maybe not great, but still better than making operators deploy (often complex) full-featured external LBs when they really just want *enough* redundancy. In many cases this seems to just create pets in the control plane. I think it'd be useful if all OpenStack APIs and their clients actively handled this poor-man's HA without having to resort to haproxy etc, or e.g., assuming operators own the DNS. -- Cheers, ~Blairo __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
