I'm working on Installation GoodData.CN into our AWS EKS and I would be happy if you could help me with the installation process.
We have two separate AWS environments: a Dev/Test-stage and a Production stage. And we are using Redshift as a datasource as well, so it's necessary for us to have the possibility to work with it during development. However, I'm not able to use Enterprise License Key for Dev/Tests stage environment.
How can I install DEV/Test version (or a Community version) to AWS Kubernetes cluster?
Could you please give me an advice, how to install GoodData.CN as a Dev/Test version?
Is it possible to obtain a DEV/Test Licence Key for a Cloud-Native installation?
GoodData provides 3 various production ready editions - Free, Growth, Enterprise. In case of Free, you can get the license key upon registration of company email. There is no limitation on number of workspaces or registrations you can make.
For Growth and Enterprise this is handled individually. We can split the amount of workspaces you require between license keys you need.
Related
I downloaded Redis server and cli to my local machine and it working good.
I just wanted to know if I can use it also in production server:
Are there any critical limitations? For example: Can I use 100 GB for free? (It will be on my computer).
I know that Redis labs cost money per month but if I download the redis to my machine and not using the redis labs, would it be free? (and the cost will be only the storage of the machine I using).
Redis is an open source software, licensed under BSD. That basically means you can do anything you want with it, without owing anyone anything.
Redis Labs, the home of open source Redis and the provider of commercial products that leverage on it, offers a wide spectrum of solutions - whether hosted, as-a-service, downloadable, remotely managed and so forth. You can (and should sometimes) use them, but that's definitely not a requirement.
Disclaimer: I work at Redis Labs and with the open source project.
I'm searching for a main difference between OpenShift Origin and OpenShift Enterprise. I know that the first is open source and the latter is the commercial version. Have OpenShift Enterprise got other features compared to the open source version?
Thanks in advance.
Update 3/21/2018: If you find this old answer of mine in the future, Enterprise is called "OpenShift Container Platform" now.
The community version goes faster, but with change comes some risk. If you would like to be an early adopter Origin could be your choice. Note: support is best effort by the community, but I have found very helpful people on IRC and on the project's github page.
Link: https://github.com/openshift/origin
The enterprise version has the advantage of professional support for your money. While you won't get features as early, in exchange there is focus on stability and streamlining. This may be important for enterprises. Some solutions / examples may not work exactly the same way. For example application templates, utilities come as part of packages for RHEL users. It also comes with some entitlements for things like RHEL and CloudForms integration.
I tried installing a one master, one node small cluster with both, and found them just as good.
In short, stability or early adoption. Oh, and bugfixes.
Personally I prefer to go with Origin, as you can monitor the state of the project yourself and you are not forced to jump on every coming train. Update when suitable.
OpenShift Origin is the open source community version of OpenShift Enterprise. In order to understand what this means, you need to understand what open source software is - computer software developed via a competitive collaborative model from many individual sources. Origin updates as often as open source developers contribute via git, a version control system, sometimes as often as several times per week.
OpenShift Enterprise 3integrates with Red Hat Enterprise Linux and is tested via Red Hat's QA process in order to offer a stable, supportable product for customers who want to have their own private or onsite cloud. Enterprise might update around every six months, maintaining stabilization across minor updates. Providing timely professional support for each query they have from installation/POC to the production.
I've been reading about Vagrant, and I find it quite useful for my development. I am currently managing a series of services (mail, web, LDAP, file sharing, etc.), and often one of these falls and needs a quick backup. Is it possible (and recommended) to use Vagrant for these purposes?
So far I've virtual machines installed like real machines.
I would also like to know about an alternative to Vagrant which would allow me to setup a simple configuration file and put a virtual machine, for example, with Zimbra, and quickly have an alternate mail server, enable RabbitMQ, etc.
Vagrant should be used more like a staging environment to test your infrastructure changes. It should be your test bed for automated infrastructure changes.
The way we use it at my company is like so:
Create VMs for our managed servers in Vagrant.
Create puppet definitions for each server.
Create cucumber tests for each server.
Make infrastructure changes via puppet and add cucumber tests.
Launch our servers to test for failures.
Fix bugs, release and/or back to step 4.
Basically when we're happy with our changes, we'll pull our puppet changes into production to make it happen.
I'd not recommend using vagrant to manage VMs for real production. I'd use something else like razor, virsh, OpenStack or one of the many other vm management systems out there.
This page suggests that the Vagrant push command is meant for deploying to production:
https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/vagrant-push-one-command-to-deploy-any-application/
"Additionally, multiple config.push.define declarations can be in a Vagrantfile to define multiple pushes, perhaps one to staging and one to production, for example."
From my experience, Vagrant mainly used in a development environment.
Vagrant configuration and provisioning options are limited compared to Terraform for example.
If you are working on a cloud based environment, you can use Terraform for infrastructure provisioning.
If your environment is local or your VMs will be hosted on a datacenter, you can use Ansible, chef or puppet for you configuration management and automation.
Hashicorp just published Otto, which is meant to be the Vagrant's successor. It is designed to support deployment environments.
From their Github page:
The key features of Otto are:
Automatic development environments: Otto detects your application
type and builds a development environment tailored specifically for that
application, with zero or minimal configuration. If your application depends
on other services (such as a database), it'll automatically configure and
start those services in your development environment for you.
Built for Microservices: Otto understands dependencies and versioning
and can automatically deploy and configure an application and all
of its dependencies for any environment. An application only needs to
tell Otto its immediate dependencies; dependencies of dependencies are
automatically detected and configured.
Deployment: Otto knows how to deploy applications as well develop
them. Whether your application is a modern microservice, a legacy
monolith, or something in between, Otto can deploy your application to any
environment.
Docker: Otto can use Docker to download and start dependencies
for development to simplify microservices. Applications can be containerized
automatically to make deployments easier without changing the developer
workflow.
Production-hardened tooling: Otto uses production-hardened tooling to
build development environments (Vagrant),
launch servers (Terraform), configure
services (Consul), and more. Otto builds on
tools that powers the world's largest websites.
Otto automatically installs and manages all of this tooling, so you don't
have to.
I had the same question and have been investigating the use of Vagrant push which as per their documentation, as of version 1.7, Vagrant is capable of deploying or "pushing" application code in the same directory as your Vagrantfile to a remote such as an FTP server.
I'm considering having vagrant spin up in a VM for developers, while also giving you the option to deploy your code to a live server for production environments.
As mentioned by #andrerpena, Otto is the successor of Vagrant.
From www.ottoproject.io :
Otto can deploy your application. Users of Vagrant for years have wanted a way to deploy their Vagrant environments to production. Unfortunately, the Vagrantfile doesn't contain enough information to build a proper production environment with industry best practices. An Appfile is made to encode this knowledge, and deployment is a single command away.
We are a very small mobile company (building an application for the iphone) and we are currently considering hosting services. We are currently leaning towards Amazon's hosting/web services. Accordingly, I have some questions:
1) Can I create an admin account on AWS and assign user accounts to developers that should have access to most (but not all) features.
2) Do we need to learn / use AWS APIs in the development of our product? I don't like the
idea of having to create hooks into a hosting service.
3) It looks like the pricing for AWS scales with usage. So, since we are in development and have only developers accessing the server right now, am I right that the cost will be quite low if anything?
4) How does AWS do version management? We have several developers scattered throughout the country. Each will need to checkout the the recent build from the server for development
on his local box. Basically, something like SVN. Is this possible?
5) I am guessing we need something like a dev, svn, and production server? Is this right? If so, how do I set this up and find out the associated costs?
6) We are considering a few database options, among them NoSQL and Neo4j - will we be able to do this using AWS? The server language will be Java.
Thanks for your time.
To answer your questions:
Yes, kind of. There is Identity and Access Management offered by AWS, but it's not the easiest solution to use. Having said that, it can allow you to lock down some of the access activities on an account so that you have some control over your users. I would say that AWS is still very much a single-user environment for server administrators.
You could get away using only the management console. Your use of scripting may only be required if you want to run batch or periodic activities (eg. take a snapshot of all machines at 2am every night).
Costs for EC2 are low, especially for the Micro machine sizes. But keep in mind that the idea of cloud computing is the availability of on-demand resources for short term use. If you run dev machines needlessly over night then you will still be paying! And if someone launches an Extra Large machine (or 30 machine instances) then you will suddenly find yourself with bigger bills than expected.
(5. and 6. as well) Amazon EC2 is really about issuing you the boxes. What you do thereafter is fully up to you. You can create snapshots daily of your machines, you can deploy SVN and noSQL etc. etc.
I've been seriously into EC2 for a while now, and lots of companies are starting to look at the idea you propose. There are benefits to giving staff on-demand compute power, without having to manage any infrastructure in-house. But I will re-iterate my first point that EC2 is very much a single-user, server administration environment, which doesn't lend itself to being used as a dev playground without additional tools. (Or at least it becomes a challenging task if you have several devs spread around in your company).
I own a business that helps companies use EC2 for dev/lab/playground type of environments. I won't directly flog it here, but will show a quick demo we just put on DropBox: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16347737/RequestEC2Machines.html Feel free to request a machine to see how adding process to EC2 can help meet your goals.
I run/develop a website using Amazon EC2 & SimpleDB and I have some comments for you on your questions
Hi.
We are a very small mobile company (building an application for the iphone) and we are currently considering hosting services. We are currently leaning towards Amazon's hosting/web services. Accordingly, I have some questions:
1) Can I create an admin account on
AWS and assign user accounts to
developers that should have access to
most (but not all) features.
In my experience, there doesn't seem to be a direct correspondence between Amazon users and users on a single instance. An instance's root account is connected to the amazon account indirectly through a key pair. Although, I must say that I haven't explored this question in detail.
2) Do we need to learn / use AWS APIs in the development of our product? I don't like the > idea of having to create hooks into a hosting service.
I manage everything through their web console and Eclipse IDE plugins. I've never had to touch the API yet for development and deployment.
3) It looks like the pricing for AWS scales with usage. So, since we are in
development and have only developers accessing the server right now, am
I right that the cost will be quite low if anything?
Micro instances cost the lowest and the cost is pretty good if you're just starting an instance for a couple of hours and then stopping it. I never think twice about starting a micro instance to try out something new
4) How does AWS do version management? We have several developers
scattered throughout the country. Each will need to checkout the the recent
build from the server for development on his local box. Basically, something like SVN.
Is this possible?
I haven't seen this feature being offered directly by Amazon. You can of course keep an instance always on for your repository with backups
5) I am guessing we need something like a dev, svn, and production server?
Is this right? If so, how do I set this up and find out the associated costs?
EC Pricing - http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/
Amazon Simple Monthly Calculator - http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html
6) We are considering a few database options, among them NoSQL and Neo4j -
will we be able to do this using AWS? The server language will be Java.
Amazon instances can be what you want them to be, hence you can either use a pre-configured ami to launch an instance or start off with a bare bones Ubuntu Server or Windows Server e.g. and build a system with what you want. You can then save the snapshot of that system to launch more in the future or to re-launch if your instance crashes
What tools or strategies are you using for automation of EC2 activities?
I need to be able to bring up a number of EC2 instances, provision various software to it (primarily Python packages), interact with S3 (primarily download data), and run various jobs. I'll be doing this both on-demand and on a scheduled basis.
I'm trying to decide if I should:
Create an AMI with all my software loaded on it
or
Launch a plain vanilla linux AMI instance and scp my software to it
For the provisioning and automation Boto looks pretty good. Or I could write something with Paramiko. Recommend either or anything else I should be looking it?
Basically I'm looking for advice / success stories, let me know what's working for you.
To answer your bullets about selecting AMIs, I would say that it depends on how much software you're installing.
I have been successful with a hybrid approach, where I build an AMI and load my heavyweight and more stable software. This is the stuff that needs to run an installer, or takes considerable time to install (remember that if you re-install a package every time as part of your startup process, you're paying for the install every time). Then, I upload the small and volatile software at provisioning/startup time. In this bucket goes most of the application code, data, etc. That way, I can change my app and not have to touch the AMI.
The benefits of this approach:
Don't have to pay for running the same software install thousands of times.
AMI can stay fairly stable over time.
Can use software that requires intervention or GUI interaction to install.
Major drawbacks:
Your AMI's OS version will become stale over time.
Your AMI may not be flexible as to the instance type/architecture it will run on. For instance, you may create it on a 32-bit OS and thereby prevent it from running on the High CPU instance types, or vice versa. So you may lock yourself into a pricing scheme.
I don't use Python, so I can't comment on either of the APIs you referenced.
AWS just released the Systems Manager suite, which includes an Automation service that will (among other things) handle your use cases around AMIs.
This question was asked some time ago now but I believe my answer could be useful to other users. I believe the best automations tools available on the market are provided by Cloud Management platforms. For example they offer auto-scaling, configuration software integration (Chef/Puppet), databases replications, dns management...
The most popular cloud management softwares are Scalr (disclaimer: I work there), RightScale and enStratus. Scalr is open-source and released under the Apache 2 license.
Regarding your specific question on AMIs, cloud Management platforms usually provide pre-configured AMIs (at Scalr, we call them roles). If you want to create your own AMI built on an existing instance, you'll be able to create snpashots and use them as a template for future instances.