-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 887
docs: reword latency explanation for HA #8860
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -6,19 +6,27 @@ endpoint. [GCP](https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/high-availability), [ | |
and other cloud vendors offer fully-managed HA Postgres services that pair | ||
nicely with Coder. | ||
|
||
For Coder to operate correctly, every node must be within 10ms of each other | ||
and Postgres. We make a best-effort attempt to warn the user when inter-Coder | ||
latency is too high, but if requests start dropping, this is one metric to investigate. | ||
For Coder to operate correctly, Coderd instances should have low-latency connections | ||
to each other so that they can effectively relay traffic between users and workspaces no | ||
matter which Coderd instance users or workspaces connect to. We make a best-effort attempt | ||
to warn the user when inter-Coderd latency is too high, but if requests start dropping, this | ||
is one metric to investigate. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. suggestion: note specific metrics, link to https://coder.com/docs/v2/latest/admin/prometheus There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I don't think we expose this over Prometheus... @kylecarbs ? |
||
|
||
We also recommend that you deploy all Coderd instances such that they have low-latency | ||
connections to Postgres. Coderd often makes several database round-trips while processing | ||
a single API request, so prioritizing low-latency between Coderd and Postgres is more important | ||
than low-latency between users and Coderd. | ||
|
||
Note that this latency requirement applies _only_ to Coder services. Coder will | ||
operate correctly even with few seconds of latency on | ||
workspace <-> Coder and user <-> Coder connections. | ||
operate correctly even with few seconds of latency on workspace <-> Coder and user <-> Coder | ||
connections. | ||
|
||
## Setup | ||
|
||
Coder automatically enters HA mode when multiple instances simultaneously connect | ||
to the same Postgres endpoint. | ||
|
||
HA brings one configuration variable to set in each Coder | ||
HA brings one configuration variable to set in each Coderd | ||
node: `CODER_DERP_SERVER_RELAY_URL`. The HA nodes use these URLs to communicate | ||
with each other. Inter-node communication is only required while using the | ||
embedded relay (default). If you're using [custom relays](../networking/index.md#custom-relays), Coder ignores `CODER_DERP_SERVER_RELAY_URL` since Postgres is the sole rendezvous for the Coder nodes. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do we consider "too high" for the health check? We might as well document this threshold as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TBH, I'm not sure what this is referring to. @kylecarbs do you know?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@bpmct this text is not being changed by this PR, just whitespace. I understand the desire to get better documentation around the health check, but it's scope creep for this PR. Can we agree on whether or not the changes this PR is making are appropriate so it can get merged?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah I misunderstood it as a text change.