I am the only developer (full-stack) in my company I have too much work other than automating the deployments as of now. In the future, we may hire a DevOps guy for the same.
Problem: We have 3 servers under Load Balancer. I don't want to block 2nd & 3rd servers till the 1st server updated and repeat the same with 2nd & 3rd because there might be huge traffic for one server initially and may fail at some specif time before other servers go live.
Server 1
User's ----> Load Balancer ----> Server 2 -----> Database
Server 3
Personal Opinion: Is there a way where we can pull the code by writing any scripts in the Load Balancer. I can replace the traditional Digital Ocean load balancer with Nginx Server making it a reverse proxy.
NOTE: I know there are plenty of other questions asked in Stack
Overflow on the same but none of them solves my queries.
Solutions I know
GIT Hooks - I know somewhat about GIT Hooks but don't want to use it because if I commit to master branch by mistake then it must not get sync to my production and create havoc in the live server and live users.
Open multiple tabs of servers and do it manually (Current Scenario). Believe me its pain in the ass :)
Any suggestions or redirects to the solutions will be really helpful for me. Thanks in advance.
One of the solutions is to write ansible playbook for this. With Ansible, you can specify to run it per one host at the time and also as the last step you can include verification check that checks if your application responds with response code 200 or it can query some endpoint that indicates the status of your application. If the check fails, Ansible will stop the execution. For example, in your case, Server1 deploys fine, but on server2 it fails. The playbook will stop and you will have servers 1 and 3 running.
I have done it myself. Works fine in environments without continuous deployments.
Here is one example
Related
I am trying to configure or setup the production environment of whatsapp business api as mentioned in the link https://developers.facebook.com/docs/whatsapp/installation/prod-single-instance
I have done everything mentioned in this my dockers are also running on port:9090 as can be seen in the image
still I can't access it. Whenever I try to call https://localhost:9090 the error with "This site can’t be reached" occurs. Whatsapp business api does not have good documentation or tutorials till now. So this site is the only last way for me.
I had a similar problem which could be your case, I saw the docker containers OK but nothing was working. After a day searching I saw where it happened, my problem was I installed mysql MANUALLY (not docker container) in the same instance where docker is running and in db.env I just used 127.0.0.1, this was passed literally to docker container, then looking at a the wait_on_mysql.sh script, the whastapp docker containers were waiting util the mysql ip has conectivity to actually do something and was printing "MySQL is not up yet - sleeping" each second, of course they wouldn't find any conectivity.
Since my instalation is for development, and I am already using such database to other stuff, my solution was to use the 172.17.0.1(docker gateway of the containers) IP instead, then add two sets of network iptables rules to the host to redirect from the docker containers IP to the IP binded by mysql when using such port (3306, the default in my case). After that everything works well. I think there are better solutions, but I didn't want to go far on it, you should evaluate you case if apply.
check the command:
docker-compose logs > debug_output.txt
That gives you insight about whats happening, hope it can helps someone.
I think your setup is already complete. You just need to start with the registration process and start sending messages. The containers are up and running but calling https://localhost:9090 won't send you any response as this is not any specified API endpoint expected to be used.
Since you're using prod single instance, the documentation can be found here which seems pretty straight forward. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/whatsapp/installation/prod-single-instance
You seem to have completed till the 7 steps. The next step can be to perform a health check to make sure it is healthy. The API endpoint for that would be https://localhost:9090/v1/health https://developers.facebook.com/docs/whatsapp/api/health
Has your db also been setup?
I cannot see it in the docker screenshot.
Also - you have to accept the certificate, as it does not have a public CA issues certificate.
I've read some articles recently on setting up AWS infrastructure w/o enabling SSH on Ec2 instances. My web app requires a binary to run. So how can I deploy my application to an ec2 instance w/o using ssh?
This was the article in question.
http://wblinks.com/notes/aws-tips-i-wish-id-known-before-i-started/
Although doable, like the article says, it requires to think about servers as ephemeral servers. A good example of this is web services that scale up and down depending on demand. If something goes wrong with one of the servers you can just terminate your server and spin up another one.
Generally, you can accomplish this using a pull model. For example at bootup pull your code from a git/mecurial repository and then execute scripts to setup your instance. The script will setup all the monitoring required to determine whether your server and application are up and running appropriately. You would still need an SSH client for this if you want to pull your code using ssh. (Although you could also do it through HTTPS)
You can also use configuration management tools that don't use ssh at all like Puppet or Chef. Essentially your node/server will pull all your application and server configuration from the Puppet master or the Chef server. The Puppet agent or Chef client would then perform all the configuration/deployment/monitoring changes for your application to run.
If you with this model I think one of the most critical components is monitoring. You need to know at all times if there's something wrong with one of your server and in the event something goes wrong discard the server and spin up a new one. (Even better if this whole process is automated)
Hope this helps.
I've deployed in Windows Azure a website made with Umbraco, using
Windows Azure Accelerator for Umbraco.
For development and test i used a test Hostname. Now it's time to switch to the official DNS hostname..
How can I change current hostname?
Actually i configured hostname at deployment time (the only way i know to do this) but i can't deploy again, since many files have been changed working on website on Azure.
EDIT
Let me explain: at the step prompt in the image (during web site deploying) I used as Domain Name "test.mywebsite.com", and configured real DNS.
Now the website is configured, so I'd like to make mywebsite.com point to that site;
But is'nt enough if i configure mywebsite DNS! Shall I deploy again? An will I lose any of the changes I made?
I'd like to make two comments on your question:
1) In order to host your Azure application under a custom host name, you will need to sign up with a DNS provider that supports C-NAME records (most do). I suggest someone like GoDaddy.com because by default C-NAME records can only resolve your "www.domainname.com" records and cannot do anything for queries where "www." is dropped from the URL. DNS providers like GoDaddy also have an option to redirect all traffic destined for "domainname.com" to a URL of your choice. This is a huge deal for Azure apps. Frankly speaking, it is somewhat disappointing that for all the PaaS and IaaS features of Azure, DNS was not included in the overall package.
2) I am a little worried when you say that you can no longer redeploy your app due to the changes made. Can you elaborate on that? Have you made changes to the application's code running on VM's in Azure without going through redeployment process? If so, this is a huge no-no. Your VM's running in Azure are not "permanent". Microsoft and your redeployment process can (and will) re-stage those VM's to the original package at any given time. Microsoft will re-image your VM's at least once a month during their monthly OS upgrades. But they can also do so when they need to move your VM to another rack, etc. Whatever changes that you make to your app must be either stored in source-control before deployment or in a permanent storage facility like SQL Azure, Azure Storage, etc.
HTH
Finally i think that the answers to my questions are:
-Shall I deploy again? Yes, i must deploy again
-Will I lose any of the changes I made? Many changes will be mantained since are stored into DB. But I have to do many activities to make new website work!
This answer confirms my theory:
In my case, I created and uploaded a site with a name, let's say
http://www.contoso.com and then paid a domain from a registrar let's say
http://www.example.com, when I mapped
http://MyAcceleratorsService.cloudapp.net/ to my new domain
( http://www.example.com ) and tried to open that domain I got the home page of
the Accelerator and not the uploaded site.
I had to upload the site again to Azure (using UploadUmbracoSite.cmd
from Accelerator application) and when uploading enter the same domain
name as the one I registered: http://www.example.com. Then, I was able to
browse my uploaded site as expected.
As for your question, will upload site again using
UploadUmbracoSite.cmd (is in the Setup folder) and will enter the new
domain name when requested.
Exactly what I was trying to avoid.. but the only solution, i suppose.
Well it was not easy to publish again, i got errors of many type (i suppose tied to some components that i've installed after deploy and that are not installed in new deployed website).. i'm going to solve them.
Edit
Completed my work:
- loads of different attempts, no-one worked
- CTP backup of DB
- deleted DB and website
- new full deploy of umbraco
- CTP restore of DB
finally:
-all work on content is OK
-all work on styles, pages, templates is lost
Changing hostname is hard; dont'use test hostname but definitive hostname from the beginning.
If anyone has suggest, i'll be pleased to test it, anyway
This is not really an answer to your question, but it might be a solution to your problem: Use a CNAME record to make the production DNS name point to your development name. E.g. www.productionname.com will the point to www.testname.com. I am not sure if everything will just work out of the box, but it seems to be worth a try.
This requires, that your hosting provider allows you to set up CNAME records.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNAME_record
We're currently using RightScale, and every time we deploy, we execute a script on the server or server array that we want to update. It pulls the code from a GitHub repository, creates a new folder in /var/www/releases/TIMESTAMP, and symlinks the document root, /var/www/current, to that directory.
We're looking to get a better deployment strategy, such as something where we SSH into one of the servers on the private network, and run a command-line script to deploy what we want to deploy.
However, this means that this one server has to have its public key in the authorized_keys of all of the servers we want to deploy to. Is this safe? Wouldn't this be a single server that would allow all the other servers to be accessed?
What's the best way to approach this?
Thanks!
We use a similar strategy to deploy, though we're not with Rightscale anymore.
I think generally that approach is fine and I'd be interested to learn what you think is not serious about it.
If you want to do your ssh thing, then I'd go about it the following:
Lock down ssh using security groups, e.g. open ssh only up to specific IP or servers with a deploy security-group, or similar. The disadvantage here is that you might lock yourself out when the other servers are down, etc..
I'd put public keys on each instance to allow a password-less login. If you're security concious, you rotate those keys on a monthly basis or for example, when employees are leaving, etc..
Use fabric or capistrano to log into your servers (from the deploy master) using ssh and do your deployment.
Again, I think Rightscale's approach is not unique to them. A lot of services do it like that. The reason is that e.g. when you symlink and keep the previous version around, it's easier to rollback and so on.
We are having a massive system having around 15 servers hosting .Net WCF services, mvc application etc.
When we do a deployment (out of office hours) we have to uninstall and install everything on the live servers.
This takes lot of time and if something goes wrong we have to rollback everything.
can you please suggest something different to this?
like
Deply into a other environment (whenever you like) and switch the URL to point to new servers
[This comes with the overhead of cost of maintaining 2 copies of production (active and passive)]
any other ideas please.
Does services need to be uninstalled for all deployments ?
You can have a script that does this against all the servers in parallel:
Stop any windows services
Stop IIS
Make backup of replaced files
XCopy assemblies, resources, website files.
Perhaps run InstallUtil if deploying a service (as needed).
Start IIS and services.
Such a script will not take too long to execute. With 15 servers it will be well worth the effort writing it and make the deployment and rollback process completely automated.
It sounds like you need a load balancer to handle the trafic to your production servers. You would deploy all your new code to Server Farm B and test it using a test DNS entry. Once you are satisfied with the changes you would repoint your load balancer addresses from Server Farm A to Server Farm B it will then become live. The only down side to this is with database changes.