What would be the behavior of a multi node kubernetes cluster if it only has a single master node and if the node goes down?
The control plane would be unavailable. Existing pods would continue to run, however calls to the API wouldn't work, so you wouldn't be able to make any changes to the state of the system. Additionally self-repair systems like pods being restarted on failure would not happen since that functionality lives in the control plane as well.
You wouldn't be able to create or query kubernetes objects(pods, deployments etc) since the required control plane components(api-server and etcd) are not running.
Existing pods on the worker nodes will keep running. If a pod crashes, kubelet on that node would restart it as well.
If worker node goes down while master is down, even the pods created by a controllers like deployment/replicaset won't be re-scheduled to different node since controller-manager(control plane component) is not running.
Related
I'm experiencing downtimes whenever the GKE cluster gets upgraded during the maintenance window. My services (APIs) become unreachable for like ~5min.
The cluster Location type is set to "Zonal", and all my pods have 2 replicas. The only affected pods seem to be the ones using nginx ingress controller.
Is there anything I can do to prevent this? I read that using Regional clusters should prevent downtimes in the control plane, but I'm not sure if it's related to my case. Any hints would be appreciated!
You mention "downtime" but is this downtime for you using the control plane (i.e. kubectl stop working) or is it downtime in that the end user who is using the services stops seeing the service working.
A GKE upgrade upgrades two parts of the cluster: the control plane or master nodes, and the worker nodes. These are two separate upgrades although they can happen at the same time depending on your configuration of the cluster.
Regional clusters can help with that, but they will cost more as you are having more nodes, but the upside is that the cluster is more resilient.
Going back to the earlier point about the control plane vs node upgrades. The control plane upgrade does NOT affect the end-user/customer perspective. The services will remaining running.
The node upgrade WILL affect the customer so you should consider various techniques to ensure high availability and resiliency on your services.
A common technique is to increase replicas and also to include pod antiaffinity. This will ensure the pods are scheduled on different nodes, so when the node upgrade comes around, it doesn't take the entire service out because the cluster scheduled all the replicas on the same node.
You mention the nginx ingress controller in your question. If you are using Helm to install that into your cluster, then out of the box, it is not setup to use anti-affinity, so it is liable to be taken out of service if all of its replicas get scheduled onto the same node, and then that node gets marked for upgrade or similar.
From what I've read about Kubernetes, if the master(s) die, the workers should still be able to function as normal (https://stackoverflow.com/a/39173007/281469), although no new scheduling will occur.
However, I've found this to not be the case when the master can also schedule worker pods. Take a 2-node cluster, where one node is a master and the other a worker, and the master has the taints removed:
If I shut down the master and docker exec into one of the containers on the worker I can see that:
nc -zv ip-of-pod 80
succeeds, but
nc -zv ip-of-service 80
fails half of the time. The Kubernetes version is v1.15.10, using iptables mode for kube-proxy.
I'm guessing that since the kube-proxy on the worker node can't connect to the apiserver, it will not remove the master node from the iptables rules.
Questions:
Is it expected behaviour that kube-proxy won't stop routing to pods on master nodes, or is there something "broken"?
Are any workarounds available for this kind of setup to allow the worker nodes to still function correctly?
I realise the best thing to do is separate the CP nodes but that's not viable for what I'm working on at the moment.
Is it expected behaviour that kube-proxy won't stop routing to pods on
master nodes, or is there something "broken"?
Are any workarounds
available for this kind of setup to allow the worker nodes to still
function correctly?
The cluster master plays the role of decision maker for the various activities in cluster's nodes. This can include scheduling workloads, managing the workloads' lifecycle, scaling etc.. Each node is managed by the master components and contains the services necessary to run pods. The services on a node typically includes the kube-proxy, container runtime and kubelet.
The kube-proxy component enforces network rules on nodes and helps kubernetes in managing the connectivity among Pods and Services. Also, the kube-proxy, acts as an egress-based load-balancing controller which keeps monitoring the the kubernetes API server and continually updates node's iptables subsystem based on it.
In simple terms, the master node only is aware of everything and is in charge of creating the list of routing rules as well based on node addition or deletion etc. kube-proxy plays a kind of enforcer whereby it takes charge of checking with master, syncing the information and enforcing the rules on the list.
If the master node(API server) is down, the cluster will not be able to respond to API commands or deploy nodes. If another master node is not available, there shall be no one else available who can instruct the worker nodes on change in work allocation and hence they shall continue to execute the operations that were earlier scheduled by the master until the time the master node is back and gives different instructions. Inline to it, kube-proxy shall also be unable to get the latest rules by sync up with master, however it shall not stop routing and shall continue to handle the networking and routing functionalities (uses the earlier iptable rules that were determined before the master node went down) that shall allow network communication to your pods provided all pods in worker nodes are still up and running.
Single master node based architecture is not a preferred deployment architecture for production. Considering that resilience and reliability is one of the major business goal of kubernetes, it is recommended as a best practice to have HA cluster based architecture to avoid single point of failure.
Once you remove taints, kubernetes scheduler don't need any tolerations to schedule pods on your master node. So it is as good as your worker node with control plane components running on it and you can also run your workload pods on this node (although its not a recommended practice).
Kube-proxy (https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/components/#kube-proxy) is the component deployed on all the nodes of cluster and it handles the networking and routing connection to your pods. So, even if your master node is down kube-proxy still works fine on the worker node and it will route traffic to your pods running on worker node.
If all your pods are running in worker nodes (which are still up and running), then kube-proxy will continue to route traffic to your pods even via service.
There is nothing inherent in Kubernetes that would cause this. The master node role is just for humans, and if you've removed the taints then the nodes are just normal nodes. That said, remember that usual rules about scheduling and resource requests apply so if your pods don't all fit then things wouldn't be scheduled. It's possible your Kubernetes deploy system set up more specialized firewall rules or similar around the control plane nodes, but that would be dependent on that system.
I am new to the Kubernetes and cluster.
I would like to bring up an High Availability Master Only Kubernetes Cluster(Need Not to!).
I have the 2 Instances/Servers running Kubernetes daemon, and running different kind of pods on both the Nodes.
Now I would like to somehow create the cluster and if the one of the host(2) down, then all the pods from that host(2) should move to the another host(1).
once the host(2) comes up. the pods should float back.
Please let me know if there is any way i can achieve this?
Since your requirement is to have a 2 node master-only cluster and also have HA capabilities then unfortunately there is no straightforward way to achieve it.
Reason being that a 2 node master-only cluster deployed by kubeadm has only 2 etcd pods (one on each node). This gives you no fault tolerance. Meaning if one of the nodes goes down, etcd cluster would lose quorum and the remaining k8s master won't be able to operate.
Now, if you were ok with having an external etcd cluster where you can maintain an odd number of etcd members then yes, you can have a 2 node k8s cluster and still have HA capabilities.
It is possible that master node serves also as a worker node however it is not advisable on production environments, mainly for performance reasons.
By default, kubeadm configures master node so that no workload can be run on it and only regular nodes, added later would be able to handle it. But you can easily override this default behaviour.
In order to enable workload to be scheduled also on master node you need to remove from it the following taint, which is added by default:
kubectl taint nodes --all node-role.kubernetes.io/master-
To install and configure multi-master kubernetes cluster you can follow this tutorial. It describes scenario with 3 master nodes but you can easily customize it to your needs.
I have kubernetes cluster working fine. I have one master node and 5 worker nodes, and all these are running pods. When all the nodes are on and if the kubernetes master goes down/ powered off, will the worker nodes keep working as normally.?
If master node is down and one of the worker node also goes down and then come back online after sometime. Then will the pod automatically be started on that worker as the master node is still down.?
When all the nodes are on and if the kubernetes master goes down/ powered off, will the worker nodes keep working as normally.?
Yes, they will work in their last state.
If master node is down and one of the worker node also goes down and then come back online after sometime. Then will the pod automatically be started on that worker as the master node is still down.?
No.
As you can read in Kubernetes Components section:
Master components provide the cluster’s control plane. Master components make global decisions about the cluster (for example, scheduling), and detecting and responding to cluster events (starting up a new pod when a replication controller’s ‘replicas’ field is unsatisfied).
For my own deployments I can use node selectors to make them run on a specific node pool. I want to do the same thing for kubernetes master pods.
(Motivation: I upgraded the kubernetes cluster today causing the aforementioned pods to be moved to some random node pool which I want to prevent from happening again in the future.)