We are starting a new project. It will be based on micro service architecture. We are considering netflix technology stack for this. For developing rest services we will be using dropwizard. So far so good. After done some reading I am getting all confused. What is different use case of
hystrix
eureka
ribbon
I know question is very vague right now. I will add further details as someone have doubts.
This article has quite though explanation of Eureka and Ribbon
Netflix Eureka - Service Discovery Server
Netflix Eureka allows microservices to register themselves at runtime as they appear in the system landscape.
Netflix Ribbon - Dynamic Routing and Load Balancer
Netflix Ribbon can be used by service consumers to lookup services at runtime. Ribbon uses the information available in Eureka to locate appropriate service instances. If more than one instance is found, Ribbon will apply load balancing to spread the requests over the available instances. Ribbon does not run as a separate service but instead as an embedded component in each service consumer.
Netflix Hystrix - Circuit breaker
Netflix Hystrix provides circuit breaker capabilities to a service consumer. If a service doesn’t respond (e.g. due to a timeout or a communication error), Hystrix can redirect the call to an internal fallback method in the service consumer. If a service repeatedly fails to respond, Hystrix will open the circuit and fast fail (i.e. call the internal fallback method without trying to call the service) on every subsequent call until the service is available again. To determine wether the service is available again Hystrix allow some requests to try out the service even if the circuit is open. Hystrix executes embedded within its service consumer.
http://callistaenterprise.se/blogg/teknik/2015/04/10/building-microservices-with-spring-cloud-and-netflix-oss-part-1/
Related
We are currently deploying our spring boot application in kubernetes and using ingress as our loadbalancer. I want to know how does the kubernetes handles the concurrent request, Is there any configuration which i need to be enabled to handle the concurrent request. We have downstream system which has 10 threads and all the threads make a webservice calls to our spring-boot application.I want to how does the kubernetes handles this request concurrently and how does it routes those request to pod We are using google kubernetes engine(gke). we have 2 pod containers are running.enter code here
Long story short: Ingress has nothing to do with concurrency. Traffic will just come to your application's process the same way regardless of you're deploying Node.js, Ruby or Java or another language...
So it's up to your application runtime (Java/SpringBoot) to figure out how to handle incoming connections and multiple requests happening on these connnections simultaneously (HTTP/1.1 vs HTTP/2 work very differently in this regard, but mostly it's abstracted from the app developer by the framework you're using).
Kubernetes networking is not trivial to understand. This talk provides a good overview of how the traffic flows in a Kubernetes cluster:
Ingress just creates an external load balancer on your cloud provider that sends the traffic back to your "Service" (cluster-internal load balancer). So to fully understand how traffic comes from $CLOUD_PROVIDER's load balancer to your app, you need to understand inner workings of "Kubernetes networking" –and it totally depends on your cloud provider and the network plugin (CNI) it uses.
From the announcement of the Spring Cloud Greenwich release, see https://spring.io/blog/2019/01/23/spring-cloud-greenwich-release-is-now-available, I noticed that is recommended to replace Netflix Ribbon with Spring Cloud Loadbalancer.
Does that mean that Spring Cloud Loadbalancer can be use by a client to connect to services registered in Netflix Eureka without using Netflix Ribbon?
I have tried to find documentation and/or examples that describes how to do that, but I haven't find any.
You can find a sample in the tests of Spring Cloud Loadbalancer.
So what you'll have to do is the following. You'll have to annotate a configuration class with #LoadBalancerClient (or wrap it in #LoadBalancerClients if you want to have multiple clients) where you specify your client's name and its config class.
In that load balancer client's config class you'll need to create a bean which will return a load balancer. In the test it's the RoundRobinLoadBalancer.
You can then use that load balancer bean to pick the next service instance, which in turn can be used to make the call to your other service.
See this test: https://github.com/spring-cloud/spring-cloud-commons/blob/master/spring-cloud-loadbalancer/src/test/java/org/springframework/cloud/loadbalancer/core/LoadBalancerTest.java#L132
Context
I am deploying a set of services that are containerised using Docker into AWS. No matter which deployment solution is chosen (e.g. raw EC2/ECS/Elastic Beanstalk/Fargate) we will face the issue of "service discovery".
To name just a few of the options for service discovery that I've considered:
AWS Route 53 Service Registry
Kubernetes
Hashicorp Consul
Spring Cloud Netflix Eureka
Specifics Of My Stack
I am developing Java Spring Boot applications using Spring Cloud with the target deployment environment being AWS.
Given that my stack is Spring based, spring cloud eureka made sense to me while developing locally. It was easy to set up a single node, integrates well with the stack and ecosystem of choice and required very little set up.
Locally, we are using docker compose (not swarm) to deploy services - one of the containers deployed is a single node Eureka service discovery server.
However, when we progress outside of local development and into staging or production environment we are considering options like Kubernetes.
My Own Assessment Of Pros/Cons
AWS Route 53 Service Registry
Requires us to couple code specifically to AWS services. Not a problem per se, we are quite tied in anyway on other parts of the stack (SNS/SQS).
Makes running the stack locally slightly more difficult as it relies on Route 53, I suppose we could open up a certain hosted zone for local development.
AWS native, no managing service registries or extra "moving parts".
Spring Cloud Eureka
Downside is that thus requires us to deploy and manage a high availability service registry cluster and requires more resources. Another "moving part" to manage.
Advantages are that it fits into our stack well (spring ecosystem, spring boot, spring cloud, feign and zuul work well with this). Also can be run locally trivially.
I presume we need to configure the networks and registry zone to ensure that that clients publish their host address rather and docker container internal IP address. e.g. if service A is on host A and wants to talk to service B on host B, service B needs to advertise its EC2 address rather than some internal docker IP.
Questions
If we use Kubernetes for orchestration, are there any disadvantages to using something like Spring Cloud Eureka over the built in service discovery options described here https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/services-networking/service/#discovering-services
Given Kube provides this, it seems suboptimal to then use eureka deployed using kube to perform discovery. I presume kube can make some optimisations that impact avaialbility and stability that might nit be possible using eureka. e.g kube would know when deploying a new service - eureka will have to rely on heartbeats/health checks and depending on how that is configured (e.g. frequency) this could result in stale records whereas i presume kube might not suffer from this for planned service shutdown/restarts. I guess it still does for unplanned failures such as a host failure or network partition.
Does anyone have any advice on this, do people use services like Kubernetes but use other mechanisms for service discovery rather than those provided by kube. Is there a good reason to do one or the other?
Possible Challenges I Anticipate
We could replace eureka, but relying on Kube to perform discovery will mean that we need to run kube locally to deploy whereas currently we have a simple tiny docker-compose file. Also, I'll have to look at how easy it'll be to ensure that ribbon, zuul and feign play nicely with this.
Currently we have ribbon configured with a eureka client so that service A can server to service B just as "service-b" for example and have ribbon resolve a healthy host via a eureka client. I guess we can configure ribbon to not use eureka and use an external Kube service name which will be resolved by Kube DNS at runtime...
Final Note
Thanks in advance for any contribution or advice. I know this might elicit a primarily opinion focused response. But I am hoping someone can provide objective guidance on when one solution might be preferable to another.
Service discovery is something you get out-of-the-box with Kubernetes. So having another external service in your platform will be another application to maintain, deploy and can be a point of failure. So I would stick with the the service discovery provided by Kubernetes.
Recently I started working with Microservices, I wrote a library for service discovery using Redis to store every service's url and port number, along with a TTL value for the entry. It turned out to be an expensive approach since for every cross service call to any other service required one call to Redis. Caching didn't seem to be a good idea, since the services won't be up all the times, there can be possible downtimes as well.
So I wanted to write a separate microservice which could take care of the orchestration part. For this I need to figure out a really low level network protocol to take care of the exchange of heartbeats(which would help me figure out if any of the service instance goes unavailable). How do applications like zookeeperClient, redisClient take care of heartbeats?
Moreover what is the industry's preferred protocol for cross service calls?
I have been calling REST Api's over HTTP and eliminated every possibility of Joins across different collections.
Is there a better way to do this?
Thanks.
I think the term "Orchestration" is not good for what you are asking. From what I've encountered so far in microservices world the term "Orchestration" is used when a complex business process is involved and not for service discovery. What you need is a Service registry combined with a Load balancer. You can find here all the information you need. Here are some relevant extras that great article:
There are two main service discovery patterns: client‑side discovery and server‑side discovery. Let’s first look at client‑side discovery.
The Client‑Side Discovery Pattern
When using client‑side discovery, the client is responsible for determining the network locations of available service instances and load balancing requests across them. The client queries a service registry, which is a database of available service instances. The client then uses a load‑balancing algorithm to select one of the available service instances and makes a request.
The network location of a service instance is registered with the service registry when it starts up. It is removed from the service registry when the instance terminates. The service instance’s registration is typically refreshed periodically using a heartbeat mechanism.
Netflix OSS provides a great example of the client‑side discovery pattern. Netflix Eureka is a service registry. It provides a REST API for managing service‑instance registration and for querying available instances. Netflix Ribbon is an IPC client that works with Eureka to load balance requests across the available service instances. We will discuss Eureka in more depth later in this article.
The client‑side discovery pattern has a variety of benefits and drawbacks. This pattern is relatively straightforward and, except for the service registry, there are no other moving parts. Also, since the client knows about the available services instances, it can make intelligent, application‑specific load‑balancing decisions such as using hashing consistently. One significant drawback of this pattern is that it couples the client with the service registry. You must implement client‑side service discovery logic for each programming language and framework used by your service clients.
The Server‑Side Discovery Pattern
The client makes a request to a service via a load balancer. The load balancer queries the service registry and routes each request to an available service instance. As with client‑side discovery, service instances are registered and deregistered with the service registry.
The AWS Elastic Load Balancer (ELB) is an example of a server-side discovery router. An ELB is commonly used to load balance external traffic from the Internet. However, you can also use an ELB to load balance traffic that is internal to a virtual private cloud (VPC). A client makes requests (HTTP or TCP) via the ELB using its DNS name. The ELB load balances the traffic among a set of registered Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) instances or EC2 Container Service (ECS) containers. There isn’t a separate service registry. Instead, EC2 instances and ECS containers are registered with the ELB itself.
HTTP servers and load balancers such as NGINX Plus and NGINX can also be used as a server-side discovery load balancer. For example, this blog post describes using Consul Template to dynamically reconfigure NGINX reverse proxying. Consul Template is a tool that periodically regenerates arbitrary configuration files from configuration data stored in the Consul service registry. It runs an arbitrary shell command whenever the files change. In the example described by the blog post, Consul Template generates an nginx.conf file, which configures the reverse proxying, and then runs a command that tells NGINX to reload the configuration. A more sophisticated implementation could dynamically reconfigure NGINX Plus using either its HTTP API or DNS.
Some deployment environments such as Kubernetes and Marathon run a proxy on each host in the cluster. The proxy plays the role of a server‑side discovery load balancer. In order to make a request to a service, a client routes the request via the proxy using the host’s IP address and the service’s assigned port. The proxy then transparently forwards the request to an available service instance running somewhere in the cluster.
The server‑side discovery pattern has several benefits and drawbacks. One great benefit of this pattern is that details of discovery are abstracted away from the client. Clients simply make requests to the load balancer. This eliminates the need to implement discovery logic for each programming language and framework used by your service clients. Also, as mentioned above, some deployment environments provide this functionality for free. This pattern also has some drawbacks, however. Unless the load balancer is provided by the deployment environment, it is yet another highly available system component that you need to set up and manage.
I want to be able to stop discovery on a running service and potentially keep it from joining with eureka for an misbehaving service. I can't see a specific property that will allow me to do this.
Basically a service is in the mix and causing issues and I want to have either a) the service stop registering to eureka or b) cancel a registration on eureka for a service.
Any ideas?
If it is not possible let me know and i will spin my own version of the discovery mechanism.