Does PCF in GCP support accessing GCP FileStore(NAS) ? We have an application in PCF (on premises) and we can access(read/write) data from NAS using SMB service. As we are moving our infrastructure to GCP, Just checking if accessing GCP FileStore from PCF is supported on GCP or do we need to consider other storage option in GCP?
Couldn't find more details regarding my use case in internet. So please anyone point me in the right direction.
Related
My application deployed to our private server and I want to use some service from GCP like Bucket and Secret manager.
Suppose my application deployed in internal server and my applicate use GCP services. Is it possible or we should deploy our app to GCP also. My application is in JSP.
How to do this. Which is best practice for this.
You have more than one option. You can use Cloud VPN, as it securely connects your peer network to your Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) network through an IPsec VPN connection. Follow this GCP’s official documentation to set it up.
Another option is Google Cloud Hybrid Connectivity focused on Cloud Interconnect as it allows you to connect your infrastructure to Google Cloud. Visit the following link for the best practices and the set up guide.
Finally, see the following thread for more reference on your connection requirement.
Is it possible to install Google Anthos on prem or ist this a pure cloud service?
In some cases in might be useful to manage cluster without a cloud connection.
Anthos is an on the cloud service provided by Google. Whilst you might not be able to have a completely isolated installation of Anthos on-prem with zero external access, Anthos on BareMetal allows you to make use of your on prem infrastructure to get the full capabilities of Anthos.
With Anthos on BareMetal the external connectivity is only used for the minimal control plane functionality of managing your clusters via the Cloud Console. Almost all the other components of Anthos reside on-prem in your infrastructure.
Useful resources.
Introduction to Anthos on bare metal by a Developer Advocate at Google.
About Anthos on BareMetal
I'm trying to create a multi-region Google Cloud Run setup and can't find any documentation.
My goal is creating an Google HTTPS Load Balancer and map the targets as my 3 Google Cloud Run instances.
https://lb.test.com/ >
eu.test.com > Europe Cloud Run
na.test.com > North America Cloud Run
sa.test.com > South America Cloud Run
Problem is, I can't find the option of mapping my HTTPS load balancer into my Cloud Run instances.
If this is not possible yet, can I use an external DNS LB such as AWS Route 53?
Thanks!
Mapping load balancer to cloud run is possible now. This can be achieved by creating NEGs (Network Endpoint Groups) which points to a cloud run service.
I have implemented this today, and came across this thread. To find out how to implement this follow instructions in
https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing/docs/negs/setting-up-serverless-negs#creating_the
I have recently published a guide on this on our official documentation: http://cloud.google.com/run/docs/multiple-regions
The solution involves adding the newly introduced "Serverless Network Endpoint Groups" as backends to your load balancer.
I do not think you can use a Google HTTPS Load Balancer to make cloud run service multiregional (HTTPS Load Balancer supports only compute engine vm as backend). Your question was very interesting and I did some research.
The only useful documents I found about this topic:
Running Multi-Region Apps on Google Cloud (Cloud Next '19).
Going Multi-Regional in Google Cloud Platform
They are explaining how you can make a cloud service multiregional using Apigee (some proxy servers HA Proxy, Nginx).
We have all of our cloud assets currently inside Azure, which includes a Service Fabric Cluster containing many applications and services which communicate with Azure VM's through Azure Load Balancers. The VM's have both public and private IP's, and the Load Balancers' frontend IP configurations point to the private IP's of the VM's.
What I need to do is move my VM's to AWS. Service Fabric has to stay put on Azure though. I don't know if this is possible or not. The Service Fabric services communicate with the Azure VM's through the Load Balancers using the VM's private IP addresses. So the only way I could see achieving this is either:
Keep the load balancers in Azure and direct the traffic from them to AWS VM's.
Point Azure Service Fabric to AWS load balancers.
I don't know if either of the above are technologically possible.
For #1, if I used Azure's load balancing, I believe the load balancer front-end IP config would have to use the public IP of the AWS VM, right? Is that not less secure? If I set it up to go through a VPN (if even possible) is that as secure as using internal private ip's as in the current load balancer config?
For #2, again, not sure if this is technologically achievable - can we even have Service Fabric Services "talk" to AWS load balancers? If so, what is the most secure way to achieve this?
I'm not new to the cloud engineering game, but very new to the idea of using two cloud services as a hybrid solution. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
As far as I know creating multiregion / multi-datacenter cluster in Service Fabric is possible.
Here are the brief list of requirements to have initial mindset about how this would work and here is a sample not approved by Microsoft with cross region Service Fabric cluster configuration (I know this are different regions in Azure not different cloud provider but this sample can be of use to see how some of the things are configured).
Hope this helps.
Based on the details provided in the comments of you own question:
SF is cloud agnostic, you could deploy your entire cluster without any dependencies on Azure at all.
The cluster you see in your azure portal is just an Azure Resource Screen used to describe the details of your cluster.
Your are better of creating the entire cluster in AWS, than doing the requested approach, because at the end, the only thing left in azure would be this Azure Resource Screen.
Extending the Oleg answer, "creating multiregion / multi-datacenter cluster in Service Fabric is possible." I would add, that is also possible to create an azure agnostic cluster where you can host on AWS, Google Cloud or On Premises.
The only details that is not well clear, is that any other option not hosted in azure requires an extra level of management, because you have to play around with the resources(VM, Load Balancers, AutoScaling, OS Updates, and so on) to keep the cluster updated and running.
Also, multi-region and multi-zone cluster were something left aside for a long time in the SF roadmap because it is something very complex to do and this is why they avoid recommend, but is possible.
If you want to go for AWS approach, I guide you to this tutorial: Create AWS infrastructure to host a Service Fabric cluster
This is the first of a 4 part tutorial with guidance on how you can Setup a SF Cluster on AWS infrastructure.
Regarding the other resources hosted on Azure, You could still access then from AWS without any problems.
As a cloud-native platform, Cloud Foundry directly uses cloud-based infrastructure
so that applications running on the platform can be infrastructure unaware.
That being said, would like to understand if I deploy any application using Cloud Foundary...
What infrastructure is uses by default ? It can be anything such as Azure or AWS or OpenStack etc... ?
Does this mean if I am using Cloud Foundary - It will always be combination of Cloud Foundary + Any IAAS provider ?
where CF will work as intermediate between our application and IAAS ?
Cloud Foundry is deployed and managed via Bosh. Bosh provides an abstracted layer above the chosen infrastructure (AWS, GCP, Azure, vSphere etc), any software deployed via Bosh is therefore ignorant, for the want of a better term, of the infrastructure it's been deployed on. When you deploy an application on Cloud Foundry it is also unaware of the infrastructure it has been deployed to. That's the whole premise of Cloud Foundry, taking away any infrastructure concern for developers, so they can concentrate on application code.