-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 164
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add Datacenter support to consul operations #81
Comments
@XerxesDGreat to answer your question, the usual scenario is that git2consul runs on the target datacenter. In our case, we use consul-replicate to move KV data from one DC to another if need be, but in general we run an instance of git2consul in the datacenter that we want those KV to appear at. |
Thanks for the response! Fair enough; I'm just trying to keep all the operations in a single location; we've got a single box which serves as a kind of utility node and was hoping to keep all instances of git2consul on that one box. From what you stated, I didn't get the feeling that there was something technically preventing using datacenter with git2consul (aside from the fact that it's not implemented, of course), just that it's not a typical use case. Can you confirm that for me? |
That's correct. From a technical point of view this can be implemented, but there are available solutions and there was no compelling use case/scenario for this. We can include it as a feature enhancement in a future release of git2consul. |
Thanks; we'll likely be trying it out soon so I can let you know how it goes. As mentioned, I already have the code changes I think would be necessary to implement this; would you be interested in these modifications so you wouldn't have to do the work? |
Feel free to submit a PR with the changes and we can take a look at it! |
Since we have use of using different data centers for various reasons, we'd like to be able to point different configurations at a specific data center. Nominally, this should be simple to do, as it is very much like the
token
property; it's something which is added on all consul calls; in fact, I've done this already in a fork (and would be happy to share)My question is whether or not there is a particular reason this hasn't been done already; is it just something which never came up / was never needed, or is there some insidious bug lurking below the surface?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: