On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 at 10:57, Remi Duraffort <remi.duraffort@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Milosz,
>
> Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 11:43, Milosz Wasilewski <milosz.wasilewski@linaro.org> a écrit :
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 10:10, Remi Duraffort <remi.duraffort@linaro.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello Milosz,
>> >
>> > I've been also playing with LAVA docker containers and docker-compose. I now provide a docker-compose.yaml file and some configuration files for lava-server at http://git.lavasoftware.org/lava/pkg/docker-compose/
>> > This docker-compose files allows to run lava server services with each services running in is own container.
>>
>> what is the difference between lava-server and lava-master in your
>> example? Also why apache2 container uses LAVA image not httpd image?
>
>
> lava-server is the gunicorn process serving the html pages
> lava-master is the scheduler and master process (master as in master <-> slave)
>
> apache2 is serving static files (lava css, js, ...) that are coming from the lava-server image. Maybe there is a better way?
I have these 3 in single container. What is the benefit of separating
gunicorn from lava-master? Did you possibly try to have several of
gunicorn containers to balance the load?
In this docker-compose setup, every service is running in his own container.
The only benefits would be to have many gunicorn processes running in parallel for load balancing (and maybe HA). That's the next thing I wanted to evaluate.
I'm not sure if it's
(currently) possible to have more than one lava-master running.
Currently, only one lava-master, lava-logs and lava-publisher can run in parallel. But we had evaluated the possibility to have many lava-logs running because that *might* be a bottleneck on some really large labs.