Kind of new to docker but have a setup with multiple microservices in docker using FastAPI each with their own Postgres DB. Have an issue where I am sending an API request to microservice A, which calls an internal microservice B which works fine, the issue arises when I make an API request to microservice A, which calls microservice B, which sends another API request to back to microservice A to completely unrelated endpoint to fetch some other data type that only exists there, only the connection just hangs on "Starting new HTTP connection" in the docker logs. Not sure where to start to look on how to debug this, any help appreciated.
Tried making multiple simultaneous connections to microservice A, no issues there.
Related
I want to have the following setup:
3 Couchbase nodes, each running on a separate container, all in the same cluster
Python application running in another container (querying, inserting, deleting data from the Couchbase cluster)
What I managed to do:
Set up a cluster, bucket, query the bucket via UI (accessed by localhost:8091)
What I didn't manage to do:
Create a connection between a Python application (which would at the end be Dockerized, for now for the sake of simplicity, let's treat it as local) and the (already working) cluster. Unfortunately, I cannot access it via Docker containers IP's with 8091 port, via localhost too. Unfortunately, the Couchbase documentation is either severely lacking here, or I just don't understand it. I tried to even use the setting-alternate-address option, but without much success (maybe I used it wrongly, so if you have any "how-to's" explaining the process, I'd still be grateful)
The connection works if there is one node, but throws Timeout if I set up 3 nodes.
I would really appreciate any tips leading to solving this problem.
EDIT: Adding code and error message:
connection_string = "couchbase://localhost"
cluster = Cluster.connect(connection_string, ClusterOptions(PasswordAuthenticator(os.getenv("LOGIN"), os.getenv("PASSWORD"))))
# following a successful authentication, a bucket can be opened.
# access a bucket in that cluster
bucket = cluster.bucket('travel-sample')
coll = bucket.default_collection()
result = coll.get('airline_10')
print(result.content_as[dict])
Error message:
couchbase.exceptions.UnAmbiguousTimeoutException: <ec=14, category=couchbase.common, message=unambiguous_timeout, context=KeyValueErrorContext:{'key': 'airline_10', 'bucket_name': 'travel-sample', 'scope_name': '_default', 'collection_name': '_default', 'opaque': 0}, C Source=C:\Jenkins\workspace\python\sdk\python-scripted-build-pipeline\py-client\src\kv_ops.cxx:209>
Couchbase SDKs need to be able to connect to every node on the cluster.
If you are running an app outside of the Docker host, it cannot connect to every node (you can't expose every node on the same port).
This is exactly why it will work fine with one node, but not with multiple (more details in the documentation)
If you run the Python app inside of a container that runs in the Docker host, it should connect just fine (or stick to a single node for development - which is mostly fine if you're not testing something specific to clustering/failover/replication).
I have a series of microservices that I have been testing. Originally it was using Service Fabric however I have switched to using Consul, Fabio, Nomad which I like better.
In development on my machine things work well however I am running into some issues actually getting Fabio to work in a cluster format.
I have a cluster of 5 nodes each running Consul, Fabio, Nomad.
Each service gets a dynamic port at runtime and successfully registers itself.
On the node which the service is running Fabio correctly forwards traffic.
However if the same fabio url is used on a different node then traffic is forwarded to the correct node/port however that is closed so the connection doesn't work.
For instance if ServiceA running on MachineA on port 1234 then http://MachineA:9999/ServiceA correctly works.
However http://MachineB/ServiceA fails after MachineA tries to initiate a connection to MachineB on port 1234.
A solution would be to add firewall rules, I would imagine, however this requires all the Services to run as Admin which I don't want.
Is there a way to support this through Fabio?
I've tried doing simple single node swarm just like in Docker tutorial part 3 and I've found out that if I use curl then I'm jumping between two replicas, but if I use Chrome then once I open the page then any following requests will be handled by the same replica. I'm sure I'm actually hitting it only once, because counter increases only by 1.
What is happening? Is it some kind of feature in Docker Swarm load balancing? If so, how would it work? No specific request headers are send to the server, so how would the load balancer recognize me? It can't be IP, because if I use incognito mode I'll be handled by different replica and I'll be stick to it as long as I'm in incognito.
It's not a Swarm thing, it's a chrome thing. Curl acts like you'd expect, each command is a new TCP request that shows as a new connection going through the Swarm VIP load balancer.
Chrome (and other browsers) have lots of methods to keep TCP connections open for future requests (HTTP keep-alives, etc). This is why it will stay connected to the same container because the connection is persistent through the LB to the replica. The LB will only shift to the "next in the round-robin pool" for a new connection.
I am using the following code snippet to start a grpc server which works fine. But whenever I need to deploy new code to the server, what is the right way for me to restart the server? Should I just kill the server process, and let client to handle the error message? Or is there a way for enabling master/worker mode like unicorn does?
s = GRPC::RpcServer.new
s.run_till_terminated
There is no such support for rolling out new deployments that's built in to the ruby-gRPC.
However, it should be possible for applications with multiple server instances to do rolling restarts. E.g., note that if gRPC connects to a server and starts to make RPC's to it and that server gets shut down, then gRPC will internally notice that the connection went bad and it will try to make its next RPC on a newly connection (the default gRPC behavior will be to perform its next RPC on the next resolved address that can be successfully connected to, and this might mean reconnecting to the same address for which the connection just broke). Note too that gRPC servers use SO_REUSEPORT by default, so one could potentially run multiple servers on the same port.
I have together 6 containers running in docker swarm. Kafka+Zookeeper, MongoDB, A, B, C and Interface. Interface is the main access point from public - only this container publish the port - 5683. The interface container connects to A, B and C during startup. I am using docker-compose file + docker stack deploy, each service has a name which is used as host for interface. Everything starts successfully and works fine. After some time (20 mins,1h,..) I am not able to make request to interface. Interface receives my requests but application lost connection with service A,B,C or all of them. If I restart interface, it's able to reconnect to services A,B,C.
I firstly thought it's problem of application so I expose 2 new ports on each service (interface, A,B,C) and connect with profiler and debugger to them. Application is running properly, no leaks, no blocked threads, normally working and waiting for connections. Debugger shows me that when I make a request to interface and interface tries to request service A, Connection reset by peer exception was thrown.
During this debugging I found out interesting stuff. I attached debugger to interface when the services started and also debugger was disconnected after some time. + I was not able to reconnect it, until I made request to the container -> application. PRoblem - handshake failed.
Another interesting stuff that I found out was that I was not able to request neither interface. So I used wireshark to see what's going on and: SYN - ACK was fine. Then application post some data and interface respond with FIN,ACK. I assume that this also happen when interface tries to request service A and it FIN the connection. Codebase of Interface, A,B and C is the same regarding netty server.
Finally, I don't think it's a application issue. Why? I tried to deploy containers not as services. I run each container separately, published the ports of each and endpoint of services were set to localhost. (not overlay network). And it is working. Containers run without problem. + I didn't say at the beginning, that the the java applications (interface, A,B,C) runs without problem when they are running as standalone application - not in docker.
Could you please help me what could be the issue? Why the docker in case of overlay network is closing sockets?
I am using newest docker. I used also older.
Finally, I was able to solve the problem.
What was happening, one more time. Interface opens permanent TCP connection to A,B,C. When you try to run these services A,B,C as a standalone java applications, everything is working. When we dockerize them and run in swarm, it was working only few minutes. Strange was that the connection between Interface and another service was interrupted in the moment when you made a request from client to interface.
After many many unsuccessful tests and debugging each container I tried to run each docker container separately, with mapped ports and as endpoint I specified localhost. (each container exposed ports and interface was connecting to localhost) Funny thing happen, it was working. When you run containers like this, different network driver for container is used. Bridge one. If you run it in swarm, overlay network driver is used.
So it had to be something with the docker network, not with application itself. Next step was tcpdump from each container after couple of minutes, when it should stop working. It was very interesting.
Client -> Interface (OK, request accepted)
Interface ->(forward request because it belongs to A) A
Interface -> A [POST]
A -> Interface [RESET]
A was reseting opened TCP communication after couple of minutes without communication. Why?
Docker uses IP Virtual Server and IPVS maintains its own connection table. The default timeout for CLOSE_WAIT connections in IPVS table is 60 seconds. Hence when the server sends something after 60 seconds, the IPVS connection is no longer available and the packet looks invalid for a new TCP session and gets RST. On the client side, the connection remains forever in FIN_WAIT2 state because the app still has the socket open; kernel's fin_wait timer kicks in only for orphaned TCP sockets.
This is what I read about it and how understand it. I am not sure if my explanation of problem is correct, but based on these assumptions I implemented ping-pong between Interface and A,B,C services in case there is no communication for <60seconds. And, it’s working.
Got the same issue.
Specified
endpoint_mode: dnsrr
to properties of the service which plays "server" role and it works just fine.
https://forums.docker.com/t/tcp-timeout-that-occurs-only-in-docker-swarm-not-simple-docker-run/58179