Bare Metal K8s Clustering at Scale

Re:Bare Metal K8s Clustering at Scale by madmax96 on Tuesday July 03, 2018 @08:18AM (#17449504)

This one was kind of troubling, if you ask me:

    >If the leader ever dies, a new leader will be elected
    >through a simple protocol that uses random sleeps and
    >leader declarations.

Why not have each node self-generate a UUID and engage in some gossip process that ends with the cluster becoming aware that some node's corresponding UUID is uniquely significant, therefore recognizing that node as a leader?

I have some really bad memories of "random sleeps" at scale.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bare Metal K8s Clustering at Scale by kevin_nisbet on Tuesday July 03, 2018 @09:01AM (#17449771)

Well, from the sounds of it they're not running at scale (always 3 nodes), and it sounds similar in principal to the way HSRP/VRRP works which is a well defined and understood protocol for doing leader election on a local network.

I suppose the question might be why not use VRRP itself, but if this works for them and has conflict resolution I don't think it's all that troubling.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bare Metal K8s Clustering at Scale by coffeesn0b on Tuesday July 03, 2018 @03:18PM (#17452914)

Caleb with CFA here - random sleeps aren't exactly the most elegant solution... this was our MVP, and we'll definitely be improving on it.

[ Parent | on HN ]