Increment the number of nodes

[rafabene]

CDK should allow a parameterized way to define more than one node to be created so these nodes can be used by developers to test the application behaviour (in kubernetes and openshift) to see how an application will behave in case of node failure.

[hferentschik]

+1, there was already #58. This seems to be a duplicate. I have this on my todo list for quite some time. As you say, this feature would be very useful to test application behavior on for example node failure. One should be able to monitor how pods gets re-started on different nodes.

That said, having multiple ADB/CDK instances running on the same host might be prohibitive from a performance aspect. Needs to be tried. The other option is to allow somehow to "join" multiple instances across multiple hosts. Not sure whether this is possible though.

[pmuir]

Is this really a CDK use case? Or is it more of a "lab" environment by this
point... Maybe the answer is to look at how the CDK and OpenShift Container
Lab interact.

On 4 August 2016 at 08:57, Hardy Ferentschik [email protected]
wrote:

+1, there was already #58
#58.
This seems to be a duplicate. I have this on my todo list for quite some
time. As you say, this feature would be very useful to test application
behavior on for example node failure. One should be able to monitor how
pods gets re-started on different nodes.

That said, having multiple ADB/CDK instances running on the same host
might be prohibitive from a performance aspect. Needs to be tried. The
other option is to allow somehow to "join" multiple instances across
multiple hosts. Not sure whether this is possible though.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#83 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJoQS_CU96BnO6zQeuk54XnQ5ehiwBDks5qcZtngaJpZM4Jaq_P
.

[hferentschik]

Is this really a CDK use case?

I think so. In my world the CDK is about the ability to experience/experiment with all possible scenarios of OpenShift development. One big promise of OpenShift is transparent fail-over. As a developer I want to be able to see/test this. Being able to at least try it (even with bad performance), I personally would see as a big feature of the CDK.

Or is it more of a "lab" environment by this point... Maybe the answer is to look at how the CDK and OpenShift Container Lab interact.

What exactly is the "OpenShift Container Lab"?

[pmuir]

On 5 August 2016 at 10:59, Hardy Ferentschik [email protected]
wrote:

Is this really a CDK use case?

I think so. In my world the CDK is about the ability to
experience/experiment with all possible scenarios of OpenShift development.
One big promise of OpenShift is transparent fail-over. As a developer I
want to be able to see/test this. Being able to at least try it (even with
bad performance), I personally would see as a big feature of the CDK.

Absolutely agreed it's a valuable thing to do. Just wondering if it should
be part of the CDK (vs something like OpenShift Container Lab.

Or is it more of a "lab" environment by this point... Maybe the answer is
to look at how the CDK and OpenShift Container Lab interact.

What exactly is the "OpenShift Container Lab"?

https://blog.openshift.com/introducing-red-hat-openshift-container-platform/

Not sure we have an offering available yet.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#83 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJoQVdpQjjWdWV1uhaPC1eQ5ujPr-N8ks5qcwlngaJpZM4Jaq_P
.

[rafaeltuelho]

I think this can be implemented following this approach:
https://github.com/thoraxe/vagrant-openshift-multihost

I'm not sure if adding more nodes we need one to be the DNS server. If yes, IMHO, "CDK multinode" ca become too heavy/complicated...