Comment by vitro
3 years ago
Let's Encrypt's database server [1] would beg to differ. For businesses at certain scale two servers are really an overkill.
[1] https://letsencrypt.org/2021/01/21/next-gen-database-servers...
3 years ago
Let's Encrypt's database server [1] would beg to differ. For businesses at certain scale two servers are really an overkill.
[1] https://letsencrypt.org/2021/01/21/next-gen-database-servers...
Do they actually say they don't have a slave to that database ready to take over? I seriously doubt Let's Encrypt has no spare.
Note I didn't say you shouldn't run one service (as in daemon) or set of services from one box, just that one box is not enough and you need that spare.
It Let's Encrypt actually has no spare for their database server and they're one hardware failure away from being down for what may be a large chunk of time (I highly doubt it), then I wouldn't want to use them even if free. Thankfully, I doubt your interpretation of what that article is saying.
You're right, from the article:
> The new AMD EPYC CPUs sit at about 25%. You can see in this graph where we promoted the new database server from replica (read-only) to primary (read/write) on September 15.
That says they use a single database, as in a logical MySQL database. I don't see any claim that they use a single server. In fact, the title of the article you've linked suggests they use multiple.
https://letsencrypt.status.io/ shows a list of their servers, which look to be spread across three data centers (one "public", two "high availability").
Do we know if it shows cold spares? That's all I think is needed at a minimum to avoid the problems I'm talking about, and I doubt they would note those if they don't necessarily have a hostname.