[DOCS-10947] Update Ops Manager example topologies: Currently include an unreliable PSA setup for production Created: 25/Oct/17  Updated: 29/Oct/23  Resolved: 22/Apr/19

Status: Closed
Project: Documentation
Component/s: Ops Manager
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Improvement Priority: Major - P3
Reporter: Mariano Escribano Assignee: Anthony Sansone (Inactive)
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 13
Labels: deployment, diagram
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified
Environment:

https://docs.opsmanager.mongodb.com/current/core/deployments/#redundant-metadata-and-snapshots


Attachments: PNG File deployment-simple.png     PNG File deployment-test.png    
Issue Links:
Gantt End to End
has to be finished together with DOCS-10065 [C/OM] Clarifications on diagrams of ... Closed
Participants:
Days since reply: 4 years, 41 weeks, 2 days ago
Epic Link: DOCSP-1743
Story Points: 0.4

 Description   

Our Ops Manager documentation includes an example topology for production that is comprised of a Primary, Secondary, Arbiter setup. It can be found here.

This is the very first example listed with some huge caveats in the note box right above it, namely the fact that the application database for Ops Manager uses a write concern of 2, yet the diagram advocates arbiters which do not count towards this requirement. As the note suggests, losing one node means losing access to Ops Manager. To make things worse, the arbiters are on the same servers are the primaries, so if that single server goes down, even the blockstore would lose a majority.

This setup is extremely unreliable and should be removed in favor of a simplistic but redundant 3 server approach. At the very least, it should not be visible to the public and should only be provided by TSEs when specifically asked due to disk space concerns.

In general, I think we should try to avoid any prominent PSA examples for any part of the documentation.

Thanks!



 Comments   
Comment by Githook User [ 29/Apr/19 ]

Author:

{'email': 'tony.sansone@mongodb.com', 'name': 'Anthony Sansone', 'username': 'atsansone'}

Message: (DOCS-10947, DOCS-10065): Updated example deployment page and diagrams.
Branch: feature/mongodb-agent
https://github.com/10gen/mms-docs/commit/083b1e9972636f1a9ec4a94dc0d2f7032191903e

Comment by Githook User [ 26/Apr/19 ]

Author:

{'email': 'tony.sansone@mongodb.com', 'name': 'Anthony Sansone', 'username': 'atsansone'}

Message: (DOCS-12645): Backport DOCS-10947, DOCS-10065 to v4.0. Updated example deployment page and diagrams.
Branch: v4.0
https://github.com/10gen/mms-docs/commit/13d41e05e4ba310e486ad17aff7953e400a3d40c

Comment by Githook User [ 23/Apr/19 ]

Author:

{'email': 'tony.sansone@mongodb.com', 'name': 'Anthony Sansone', 'username': 'atsansone'}

Message: (DOCS-12646): Backport DOCS-10947, DOCS-10065 to v4.1
Branch: v4.1
https://github.com/10gen/mms-docs/commit/fe87bb2838c1ce7cc04821bfec2b205ebcf7300f

Comment by Githook User [ 22/Apr/19 ]

Author:

{'name': 'Anthony Sansone', 'username': 'atsansone', 'email': 'tony.sansone@mongodb.com'}

Message: (DOCS-10947, DOCS-10065): Updated example deployment page and diagrams.
Branch: master
https://github.com/10gen/mms-docs/commit/0dbe6146ec1c5e6283fae11a8a2cbf8927f49c4e

Comment by Anthony Sansone (Inactive) [ 18/Apr/19 ]

mariano.escribano: This is now a PR: https://github.com/10gen/mms-docs/pull/2264

Please review.

Comment by Mariano Escribano [ 16/Apr/19 ]

tony.sansone Very nice, yes, these look much better and also get rid of the Arbiter reference as hoped. Of course, once the simple deployment diagram is in, we will have to adjust the NOTE right above it to say that high availability will be lost after 2 nodes are lost due to w:2.

Emilio's concern above is valid, but that should be the exception, not the norm. The docs should always reflect best practices and If a customer has budget/space constrains then they should seek our guidance for a slimmer deployment.

Comment by Anthony Sansone (Inactive) [ 16/Apr/19 ]

mariano.escribano: Please have a look at these updates. If these look good, I will adjust the page text accordingly.

Generated at Thu Feb 08 08:01:44 UTC 2024 using Jira 9.7.1#970001-sha1:2222b88b221c4928ef0de3161136cc90c8356a66.