On 19/08/2020 14:48, Michael Jones wrote:
On 19/08/2020 12:12, Michael Jones wrote:
> On 19/08/2020 10:41, Nir Soffer wrote:
>>> There is no warning the method was deprecated and will be missing
functionality.
>>>
>>> The steps detailed on the alt install page are for the all-in-one running
engine-setup.
>>>
>>> It's also worth noting this works fine in;
>>>
>>> Version 4.3.1.1-1.el7
>>>
>>> but not in;
>>>
>>> Version 4.4.1.10-1.el8
>>>
>>> (el8 has the change in imageio daemons)
>>>
>>> The alternate install method is still useful to have, but i think a red
warning about all-in-one on el8 on that page would be good.
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Michael Jones
>> Micheal, can you file a bug for this?
>>
>> If you have a good use case for all-in-one deployment (not using
>> hosted engine), please explain
>> it in the bug.
>>
>> Personally I think simple all-in-one deployment without the complexity
>> of hosted engine is better,
>> and we should keep it, but for this we need to teach engine to handle
>> the case when the proxy
>> and the daemon are the same server.
>>
>> In this case engine will not try to setup a proxy ticket, and image
>> transfer would work directly
>> with the host daemon.
>>
>> I'm not very optimistic that we will support this again, since this
>> feature is not needed for RHV
>> customers, but for oVirt this makes sense.
>>
>> Nir
>>
> Yes, I can file a bug,
>
> The main usage / setup's I have are;
>
> on-prem installs:
>
> - hosted engine
> - gluster
> - high availiblity
> - internal ip address
> - easy great...
>
> dedicated host provider for example OVH single machine:
>
> - alternate install
> - all-in-one
>
> The main reason for the separation is that using the cockpit install
> / hosted engine install causes problems with ip allocations;
>
> cockpit method requires 1x ip for host, and 1x ip for engine vm, and
> both ip must be in the same subnet...
>
> applying internal ip would cut off access, and to make it even
> harder, getting public ip blocks didn't work as the box main ip
> wouldn't be in the same subnet, adding nic alias ip doesn't work
> either (fail on install due to failing to setup ovirtmgmt network).
>
> atm, i'll struggle with changing the machine's main ip to be one of
> the same subnet with the engine one... (currently causes host to be
> taken offline due to hosting provider, health checks)
>
> provided i can change the host primary ip to be one of the OVH
> failover ip allocated in a block... i will be able to install using
> the cockpit.
>
> and after the install i can setup internal ip with the network tag.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Mike
>
despite managing to get OVH to disable monitoring (ping to the main
ip, and rebooting host) and getting the host in the same ip range as
the engine vm...
ie:
host ip: 158.x.x.13/32 = not used anymore
new subnet: 54.x.x.x/28
and reserving;
host = 54.x.x.16
engine = 54.x.x.17
[ ERROR ] The Engine VM (54.x.x.17/28) and the default gateway
(158.x.x.254) will not be in the same IP subnet.
the hosted engine installer crashes due to the gw being in a different
subnet, so all three;
- host
- engine
- gateway
must be in the same subnet...
this rules out an install on ovh dedicated server.
unless... I can install the all-in-one again (this bit works), and
then install the engine vm in an existing all-in-one setup...
essentially the cockpit installation is not compatible with this infra
setup.
After going through the documentation again, I understand the best way
to approach this would be to have a remote manager, ie;
self hosted engine (on-prem) > host/2nd DC/Cluster (remote/ovh)
standalone manager (on-prem) > host/2nd DC/Cluster (remote/ovh)
That way resolves the ip issues (only need host ip, just don't install
the manager on the remote server)
outstanding... i need to workout the security implications of this.
shame all-in-one is gone, but the above does work, and even means the
remote host can again use local storage.
I'll raise the bug report now i've finished testing, as I think stand
alone, all-in-one, dedicated hosts are affordable and open ovirt to a
wider user base (keeping hardware requirements minimal).
Thanks again,
Mike