Change Details

Hi everybody, I opened this task after a chat with Faidon about AQS and per-cassandra-instance DNS records. As far as I know, those records are needed for the Cassandra seed list, but I am not sure if we could replace them with ports, in the following way: * aqs1004-a.eqiad.wmnet, aqs1004-b.eqiad.wmnet => aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7776, aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7777 (totally random ports for this example of course) Is there a reason why we don't do this? Getting rid of the per instance record could reduce the corner cases needed for our DNS creation automation :) One thing that I noticed from https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#seed-provider is that the example mentions an IP:host port combination, but it might be only for Cassandra 4.x. Is there any reason why we shouldn't try to get rid of the per instance DNS records?

Hi everybody, I opened this task after a chat with Faidon about AQS and per-cassandra-instance DNS records. As far as I know, those records are needed for the Cassandra seed list, but I am not sure if we could replace them with ports, in the following way: * aqs1004-a.eqiad.wmnet, aqs1004-b.eqiad.wmnet => aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7776, aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7777 (totally random ports for this example of course) Is there a reason why we don't do this? Getting rid of the per instance record could reduce the corner cases needed for our DNS creation automation :) One thing that I noticed from https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#seed-provider is that the example mentions an IP:host port combination, but it might be only for Cassandra 4.x.

Hi everybody, I opened this task after a chat with Faidon about AQS and per-cassandra-instance DNS records. As far as I know, those records are needed for the Cassandra seed list, but I am not sure if we could replace them with ports, in the following way: * aqs1004-a.eqiad.wmnet, aqs1004-b.eqiad.wmnet => aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7776, aqs1004.eqiad.wmnet:7777 (totally random ports for this example of course) Is there a reason why we don't do this? Getting rid of the per instance record could reduce the corner cases needed for our DNS creation automation :) One thing that I noticed from https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#seed-provider is that the example mentions an IP:host port combination, but it might be only for Cassandra 4.x. Is there any reason why we shouldn't try to get rid of the per instance DNS records?