We also not a big fan of HA cluster using pacemaker. Happy to see that went away with 3.1. Planning to use a simple load balancer in front of masterss and balance the api traffic across them.
Hope that is the right approach.
From: Jason DeTiberus <jdetiber redhat com>
Date: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 9:23 AM
To: skotaru <skotaru cisco com>, "ccoleman redhat com" <ccoleman redhat com>
Cc: "dev lists openshift redhat com" <dev lists openshift redhat com>, "users lists openshift redhat com" <users lists openshift redhat com>
Subject: Re: master and etcd installation
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Srinivas Naga Kotaru (skotaru) <skotaru cisco com> wrote:
I suspect Clayton was referring to the etcd service running on the master and not the master service itself, however I've cc'd him in case he wants to correct me on that.
We don't officially make a recommendation either way, our quick installation methods co-reside the services for HA installations, and we have the option in the advanced installation to separate the deployment of etcd and master hosts.
We released a 3.0 Reference Architecture: https://access.redhat.com/articles/1755133, however for 3.1 we recommend using the native HA support instead of using pacemaker for HA. There is an updated Reference Architecture that is being worked on, but I'm not sure of when it will be completed.