Restricted port number prohibits running mutliple instances of the bridge

[Dr. Jürgen Hannappel]

Description
The port number argument is now limited to ony two choices, 4242 and 8443, where the 8443 port is used to select a TLS connection.
This makes it impossible to run multiple instances of the bridge on one node, because everyu instance needs it's own port.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
call zimonGrafanaIntf.py with -p 4243

Expected behavior
Being able to run the bridge with an arbitrary port, as it was possible in old versions.

Desktop (please complete the following information):
We run several instances of the Bridge for our various clusters, most of them on one node.

• IBM Spectrum Scale system type:
  • [*] IBM Spectrum Scale classic cluster.
  • IBM Spectrum Scale Container Native Storage Access (CNSA).
  • [*] IBM Elastic Storage Server (ESS).
• IBM Spectrum Scale cluster version: 5.0.5.1
• IBM Spectrum Scale bridge for Grafana version: 6.1.3
• Grafana version: 8.0.3
• OS Grafana is installed on: CentOS 7

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

[Helene Wassmann]

what do you mean with the node? gpfs node? host?

[Dr. Jürgen Hannappel]

Hello, I mean the node that's used to run the grafana bridge. In our setup we have 15 GPFS clusters and we have only a few machines suitable for running the grafana bridge, due to various reasons like load, netweork conectivity and so on, so we have to run multiple instances of he bridge on one single node. This is now a gpfs node which runs alo one of the PMcollectors. Greetings, Jürgen

…

From: "Helene Wassmann" ***@***.***> To: "IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana" ***@***.***> Cc: "Juergen Hannappel" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Tuesday, 29 June, 2021 19:09:58 Subject: Re: [IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana] Restricted port number prohibits running mutliple instances of the bridge (#35) what do you mean with the node? gpfs node? host? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, [ #35 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEN4BTFST2ERZ7TCM4XIPODTVH46NANCNFSM47QRBHOA | unsubscribe ] .

[Helene Wassmann]

Hello Juergen,
thanks for your quick response. One question more: How the bridges are connected to the GPFS pmcollector nodes, I guess remotely? And 1 bridge per 1 pmcollector per GPFS cluster, or do you have multiple bridges connected to the same gpfs cluster?

[Dr. Jürgen Hannappel]

Hello, various. One bridge is directly (localhost) connected to the pmcollector, the others are remote connected. We also have for the biggest cluster 2 bridges, because we saw in the past performance problems when many grafana browser tabs were open ("many" meaning ~4), so we have two grafana instances hat can access the data (one for the peaople at european XFEL, one for the crew at DESY) and we spent one bridge instance for each grafana instance.

…

From: "Helene Wassmann" ***@***.***> To: "IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana" ***@***.***> Cc: "Juergen Hannappel" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, 30 June, 2021 08:52:28 Subject: Re: [IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana] Restricted port number prohibits running mutliple instances of the bridge (#35) Hello Juergen, thanks for your quick response. One question more: How the bridges are connected to the GPFS pmcollector nodes, I guess remotely? And 1 bridge per 1 pmcollector per GPFS cluster, or do you have multiple bridges connected to the same gpfs cluster? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, [ #35 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEN4BTHEGZ5GMBJPAKCVU6LTVK5KZANCNFSM47QRBHOA | unsubscribe ] .

[Helene Wassmann]

thanks Juergen, for giving me some updates about your environment. I'm thinking about removing fix port bindings for http, but https connections as well, from the source code and add https selection controll over additional flaq (option). It might take a couple of days before I'll be ready with the fix . As soon as the fix is done, I'll publish the new 6.1.4 version. As workaround for you, edit the line in the source code as follows:

parser.add_argument('-p', '--port', action="store", type=int, default=None, help='port number listening on for HTTP(S) connections (Default from config.ini: 4242)')

...and restart the bridge using -p 4243

[Dr. Jürgen Hannappel]

Thanks! I applied such a patch already and the bridges are running now. A side remark: Am I right that the support for 5.1.1 with the apiKeys is only available in the Bridge v7 branch?

…

From: "Helene Wassmann" ***@***.***> To: "IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana" ***@***.***> Cc: "Juergen Hannappel" ***@***.***>, "Author" ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, 30 June, 2021 13:50:50 Subject: Re: [IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana] Restricted port number prohibits running mutliple instances of the bridge (#35) thanks Juergen, for giving me some updates about your environment. I'm thinking about removing fix port bindings for http, but https connections as well, from the source code and add https selection controll over additional flaq (option). It might take a couple of days before I'll be ready with the fix . As soon as the fix is done, I'll publish the new 6.1.4 version. As workaround for you, edit the [ https://github.com/IBM/ibm-spectrum-scale-bridge-for-grafana/blob/master/source/confParser.py#L181 | line ] in the source code as follows: parser.add_argument('-p', '--port', action="store", type=int, default=None, help='port number listening on for HTTP(S) connections (Default from config.ini: 4242)') ...and restart the bridge using -p 4243 — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, [ #35 (comment) | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEN4BTD54XHNF4XI2VYGUETTVMAJVANCNFSM47QRBHOA | unsubscribe ] .

[Helene Wassmann]

Right, the apiKeys have been introduced with GPFS release code 5.1.1. For those, the bridge 7.0 need to be used. The port changes will be merged in the 7.x as well.

[Helene Wassmann]

This request have been resolved with the commit 51425587f68ad9c974c22b55e992fcd21465d462

The fix is available in the bridge release version 6.1.4 and will be included in the version 7.0.1 as well.