Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 19, 2018. It is now read-only.

Usage details? #1

Open
kf6kjg opened this issue Sep 28, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

Usage details? #1

kf6kjg opened this issue Sep 28, 2015 · 3 comments

Comments

@kf6kjg
Copy link

kf6kjg commented Sep 28, 2015

Is this required to be one Aperture server per region (Halcyon) server operating system, or can/should there be one central Aperture server, or possibly a separate cluster of Aperture servers that are distinct from the region servers?

From what I hear from Vin it's supposed to be 1 Aperture per server, and each server has at least one copy of Halcyon loaded on it: one independent copy of Halcyon per region. Where server in this case means an installation of an operating system - whether on a VM or directly on the hardware is irrelevant. :)

@appurist
Copy link
Member

Yes, Aperture is normally run with one local copy per server machine / VM. In gridmode, there may be multiple Halcyon region instances running on that machine, all sharing a single Aperture, but each machine/VM typically runs its own local Aperture server.

@kf6kjg
Copy link
Author

kf6kjg commented Sep 28, 2015

That's what I understood. Good.

Do you know any reason why it couldn't be run separately? I'm thinking of
localhost-only connections or whathaveyou. Of course firewalls would have
to be configured, yada yada, but I'm just thinking about architecture here.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Jim Tarber [email protected]
wrote:

Yes, Aperture is normally run with one local copy per server machine / VM.
In gridmode, there may be multiple Halcyon region instances running on that
machine, all sharing a single Aperture, but each machine/VM typically runs
its own local Aperture server.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1 (comment).

@ddaeschler
Copy link
Contributor

The halcyon code base may feed out the local ip and host name when giving the location of the aperture cap to the client. You'll have to check it out. That would be easy to fix though

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants