I want to be able to access my MongoDB database from 2 Openshift apps- one app is an interactive database maintenance app via the browser, the other is the principle web application which runs on mobile devices via an Openshift app. As I see it in Openshift, MongoDB gets set up within a particular app's folder space, not independent of that space.
What would be the method to accomplish this multiple app access to the database ?
It's not ideal but is my only choice to merge the functionality of both Openshift apps into one ? That's tastes like a bad plate of spaghetti.
2018 update: this applies to Openshift 2. Version 3 is very different, and however the general rules of linux and scaling apply, the details got obsolete.
Although #MartinB answer was timely and correct, it's just a link, so let me put the essentials here.
Assuming that setting up a non-shared DB is already done, you need to find it's host and port. You can ssh to your app (the one with the DB) or use the rhc:
rhc ssh -a appwithdb
env | grep MONGODB
env brings all the environment variables, and grep filters them to show only Mongo-related ones. You should see something like:
OPENSHIFT_MONGODB_DB_HOST=xxxxx-yyyyy.apps.osecloud.com
OPENSHIFT_MONGODB_DB_PORT=zzzzz
xxxxx is the ID of the gear that Mongo sits on
yyyyy is your domain/namespace
zzzzz is MongoDB port
Now, you can use these to create a connection to the DB from anywhere in your Openshift environment. Another application has to use the xxxxx-yyyyy:zzzzz URL. You can store them in custom variables to make maintenance easier.
$ rhc env-set \
MYOWN_DB_HOST=xxxxx-yyyyy \
MYOWN_DB_PORT=zzzzz \
MYOWN_DB_PASSWORD=****** \
MYOWN_DB_USERNAME=admin..... \
MYOWN_DB_NAME=dbname...
And then use the environment variables instead of the standard ones. Just remember they don't get updated automatically when the DB moves away.
Please read the following article from the open shift blog: https://blog.openshift.com/sharing-database-across-applications/
Related
I've nearly got a SpringBoot app running on Google Cloud services that is connected to a Postgres instance.
I've ran through the steps on their guide, located here and have gotten to the point where I need to set my variables up for the app to find the database instance:
The problem encountered is two fold:
I don't know where and how to set these
My server logs report this error:
meaning that the Spring application is trying to find the database like it would on my local.
I set the following values in the app.yaml (assuming this is where they should be?)
runtime: java11
instance_class: F1
env_variables:
SQL_USER: quickstart-user
SQL_PASSWORD: <password>
SQL_DATABASE: quickstart_db
INSTANCE_CONNECTION_NAME: quickstart-instance
So, my question(s) are:
Is this the correct place to set them?
If not, do I need a appengine-web.xml file instead (And does anyone have an example of what this looks like, I can't find one)
How do I stop the app from looking for the local database?
Thanks
Currently I have a VM running and installed the binaries needed for fabric-ca. I have a docker-compose file looking like this:
I have some questions regarding this:
the docker-compose file will create one container, if I want it for
more organizations, do I need to copy/paste this and change the port
number? (I don't want to use intermediate CAs).
When registering/enrolling an identity, it will override the default
materials because It will always put the materials from the new identity in /etc/hyperledger/fabric-ca-client. So when creating multiple
identities (orderer, peers, users etc..) how do I need to organize
them? What's the best practise?
In the image you can see that the server and clients are specified,
is this a good approach? Or should the client and the server be a
different container?
More than one CA in a Docker Compose file - you can look at the Build your first network tutorial in the Fabric Docs which has a 2 Org network and various configuration files including Docker Compose.
Combined client/server Container - This might be convenient for testing, but in a production scenario definitely not for Security and Operational Integrity reasons.
Overwriting Identities - the enroll command writes a tree of data to the location specified by the environment variable FABRIC_CA_CLIENT_HOME but you can use --home to redirect the tree to a different location:
fabric-ca-client enroll -u http://Jane:janepw#myca.example.com:7054 --home /home/test/Jane/
Ghost blog platform has a setting that allows you to change the admin panel login location (which starts as: https://whateveryoursiteis.com/ghost). Methodology / docs for changing that setting can be found here: https://ghost.org/docs/config/#admin-url
However — when using the above methodology the API Url that is used for Search etc etc is ALSO modified meaning all requests to the ghost API will also be forwarded to the alternate domain (not just the admin access).
My question is — what is the best way to achieve a redirect of the admin URL to a different Domain / protocol while allowing the API url used by Ghost to remain the same?
More background.
We are running ghost on top of GKE (Google Kubernetes Engine) on a Multi-Region Ingress which allows us to dump our CloudSQL DB down to a SQLite file and then build that database into our production Docker Containers which are then deployed to the different Kubernetes nodes that are fronted by the GCE-Ingress load balancer.
Since we need to rebuild that database / container on content change (not just on code change) we need to have a separate Admin URL backed by Cloud SQL where we can persist / modify our data which then triggers the rebuild on our Ci pipeline via Ghost Webhooks.
Another related question might be:
Is it possible to use standard ghost redirects (created via: https://docs.ghost.org/concepts/redirects/) to redirect the admin panel URL (ie. https://whateveryoursiteis.com/ghost) to a different domain (ie. https://youradminsite.com/ghost)?
Another Related GKE / GCE-Ingress Question:
Is it possible to create 301 redirects natively using Kuberentes GCE-Ingress on GKE without adding an nGinx container etc?
That will be my first attempt after posting this — but I figured either way maybe it helps another ghost platform fan down the line someplace — I will attempt to respond back as I find answers to those questions (assuming someone doesn't beat me to it!).
Regarding your question if it's possible to create 301 redirects without adding a nginx container, I can suggest to use istio, find out more information about traffic routing here.
OK. So as it turns out the Ghost team currently has things setup to point API connections at the Admin URL. So if you change your Admin URL expect your clients to attempt to connect to that URL.
I am going to be raising the potential of splitting these off as a feature request over on the ghost forums (as soon as I get out from under pre-launch hell on the current project).
Here's the official Ghost response:
What is referred as 'official docker image' is not something that we
as a Ghost team support.
The APIs are indeed hosted under the same URL as the admin and that's
by design and not really a bug. Introducing configuration options for
each API Ghost instance hosts would be a feature and should be
discussed at our forum first 👍 I think it's a nice idea to be able to
serve APIs from different host, but it's not something that is within
our priorities at the moment.
In case you need more granular handling of admin site, you could
introduce those on your proxy level and for example, handle requests
that are coming to /ghost/api with a different set of rules.
See the full discussion over here on the TryGhost GitHub:
https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/issues/10441#issuecomment-460378033
I haven't looked into what it would take to implement the feature but the suggestion on proxying the request could work... if only I didn't need to run on GKE Multi region (which requires use of GCE-Ingress which doesn't have support for redirection hah!). This would be relatively easy to solve the nGinx ingress.
Hopefully this helps someone — I will update as I work through the process. As of now I solved it by dumping my GCP CloudSQL database down to a SQLite db file during build time (thereby allowing me to keep my admin instance clean and separate from the API endpoint — which for me remains the same URL).
I am trying to start a google compute engine (GCE) instance with a pre-configured FQDN. We are intending to run an application that is licensed based on the contents of /etc/hosts.
I am starting the instances using the Google Cloud SDK utility - gcloud.
I have tried setting the "hostname" key using the metadata option like so:
gcloud compute instances create mynode (standard opts) --metadata hostname=mynode.example.com
Whenever I log into the developer console, under computer, instances, I can see hostname under "Custom metadata". This appears to be a new, custome key - it has no impact on what:
http://metadata.google.internal/computeMetadata/v1/instance/hostname
returns.
I have also tried setting "instance/hostname" like the below, which causes a parsing error when using gcloud.
--metadata instance/hostname=mynode.example.com
I have successfully used the startup scripts functionality of the metadata server to run a startup script that parses the new, internal IP address of the newly created instance, updated /etc/hosts. This appears to work but doesn't feel "like the google way".
Can I configure the FQDN (specifically, a domain name, as the instance name is always the hostname) of an instance, during instance creation, using the metaserver functionality?
try this:
Go to your GCE >> VM instances panel.
stop your gce instance.
clic on the instance name.
Edit your instance, adding this values on Custom metadata fields:
Key field: hostname / Value field: your.server.hostname
Key field: startup-script / Value field: sudo -s hostnamectl set-hostname your.server.hostname
setup-example-image.png
Finally, start your instance and test with a hostnamectl command.
regards!
According to this article 'hostname' is part of the default metadata entries that provide information about your instance and it is NOT possible to manually edit any of the default metadata pairs. You can also take a look at this video from the Google Team. Within the first few minutes it is mentioned that you cannot modify default metadata pairs. As such, it does not seem like you can specify the hostname upon instance creation other than through the use of a start-up script like you've done already. It is also worth mentioning that the hostname you've specified will get deleted and auto-synced by the metadata server upon reboot unless you're using a start-up script or something that would modify it every time.
If what you're currently doing works for what you're trying to accomplish, it might be the only workaround to your scenario.
Here is a patch for /usr/share/google/set-hostname to set FQDN to GCE instance.
https://gist.github.com/yuki-takeichi/3080521322f0f1d159ea6a343e2323e6
Before you use this patch, you must set your desired FQDN in your instance's metadata by specifying hostname key.
Hostname is set each time instance's IP address is renewed by dhclient. set-hostname is just a hook script which dhclient executes and serves new IP address and internal hostame to, and modifies /etc/hosts. This patch changes the source of hostname by querying instance's metadata from metadata server.
The original set-hostname script is here:
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-packages/blob/master/google_config/bin/set_hostname.
Use this patch at your own risk.
When creating a VM, you can specify a custom FQDN hostname as an optional parameter. This feature is currently in Beta.
$ gcloud beta compute instances create INSTANCE_NAME --hostname example.hostname
This should work across OSes, and eliminate the need for workaround scripts.
More info in the docs.
-- Sirui (Product Manager, Google Compute Engine)
I've looked throughout this site to find answered questions and found a few things that work but with a couple solutions combined. This thread seems the place to answer.
1) echo example.com > /etc/hostname
2) add -- 127.0.1.1 example.com in /etc/hosts
3) add -- hostnamectl set-hostname
example.com -- command to /etc/rc.local script
4) uncomment /etc/dhcp/dhclient.conf line:
supersede domain-name "example.com";
5) profit.... Seems to stick after each reboot
(Note example.com is your domain name: fqdndomain.com - yourfqdndomain.org)
Also note this is for Ubuntu or Debian. Other Unix May slightly vary. I've tested this on Ubuntu 16.04
Always on the wording NOT possible to manually edit any of the default metadata pairs, how about the instant level default metadata "/scheduling"? we could set them manually as mentioned in this article
I'm trying to figure out the correct way to architect a solution to automatically configure new Rails App servers.
I've looked at the chef-rails cookbook and it seems a little verbose. In our case we always deploy Nginx a certain way, always perform backups a certain way, etc, so much of the configuration would be redundant from one node definition to the next.
My goal is to be able to create a new Rails App server by defining just the following information.
wh_webhead "test_app" do
ssl :enable
backups :enable
passenger :enable
ruby_version 2.0.0
db_type :mysql
db_user "testuser"
db_pass "3207496r9w6"
nagios_ssl_string_match "login"
end
Then I would like Chef to perform the following actions:
Create user accounts
Setup box and install
Install Nginx w/wildcard SSL cert
Configure log rotation
Setup firewall rules to allow traffic to ports 80 and 443
Install Passenger and RVM with Ruby 2.0.0
Create Rails app dirs following template (e.g. /opt/local/test_app)
Create new database on MySQL server, grant access, and setup firewall rules
Create firewall rules for Nagios and configure Nagios to monitor:
port 80 for redirection to port 443
port 443 for HTTP 200 status
port 443 for the text "login"
Configure backups for app dir (e.g. /opt/local/test_app)
I'm already using the community cookbooks for Nginx, Nagios, Ufw, etc and have created recipes in a custom cookbook to configure Mysql and Nginx. There's just a lot of duplicate code from one app's Nginx/Mysql cookbook to the next.
What I'm struggling with is where to use Cookbooks, Recipes, LWRPs and Definitions to properly abstract this.
Should I put the default configuration for Nginx and Mysql in Definitions and then use those in recipes or create custom wrapper cookbooks with the defaults?
First, take a look at the application_ruby and artifact cookbook, both of which can automate these workflows for you.
I specifically enjoy using the artifact cookbook, as it provides a lot of flexibility, but the application_ruby cookbook has built-in support for Passenger, Unicorn and other tools you'd normally find in a Rails application requirements.
As for your question regarding Cookbooks, Recipes, LWRPs and Definitions I would definitely look at #sethvargo's answer at https://stackoverflow.com/a/21733093/747032. It provides a good guide on what to use when, from an employee at Opscode (now called Chef (the company)), and someone who is constantly involved in the Chef community and thus has excellent knowledge on this topic.
As far as my advice (which I'll keep concise):
Use LWRP's to wrap a lot of resources that are always called together, for example, we use an "AWS EBS" LWRP, to create, mount and format new EBS'.
Use recipes to call on all your LWRP's (both custom and public) and resources.
Don't use definitions, they are really deprecated by LWRP's in my opinion.