Trove/Replication-And-Clustering

Summary/Viewpoints/Strategy

 * Purposefully avoids introducing a /cluster API
 * Purposefully avoids the proliferation of configuration-groups to accommodate mandatory fields in the context of clusters/topologies
 * Purposefully avoids introducing a v2 API
 * Instead, introduces cluster{} field and /instance//cluster routes
 * cluster{}'s charter is to include cluster-related fields that are absolutely required to construct the initial cluster.
 * Cluster-influenced actions are handled via: 'PUT /instances//cluster', where  is any arbitrary instance in the cluster.
 * Requests against 'PUT /instances//cluster' will follow the format of: { " ": {  } }
 * Where possible and logical, consolidate similar s amongst datastores.

Create Master
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "products", "datastore": { "type": "mysql", "version": "5.5" },   "configuration": "b9c8a3f8-7ace-4aea-9908-7b555586d7b6", "flavorRef": "7", "volume": { "size": 1 } } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "products", "configuration": { "id": "b9c8a3f8-7ace-4aea-9908-7b555586d7b6", "name": "config-a", "links": [{...}] },   ...  } }

Create Slave
--vipuls (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC) I'm not a big fan of introducing the 'cluster' attribute to wrap what is a read-only slave. Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", "datastore": { "type": "mysql", "version": "5.5" },   "cluster": { "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "read_only": true },   "configuration": "fc318e00-3a6f-4f93-af99-146b44912188", "flavorRef": "7", "volume": { "size": 1 } } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "cluster": { "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "read_only": true },   "configuration": { "id": "fc318e00-3a6f-4f93-af99-146b44912188", "name": "config-b", "links": [{...}] },   ...  } }

Notes:
 * For master/slave wirings, the 'server_id' must differ between master and slave, and optionally the slave can specify whether it is read-only or not to avoid accidental writes.
 * Update: Agreed on 03/14/14 that the user should not have to specify 'server_id'. Instead, trove will be responsible for setting it and ensuring that a slave does not have the same server_id as its master, or any sibling slaves. As a part of this agreement, this requires removing 'server_id' from configuration-groups overrides (to avoid the user meddling with our bookkeeping).
 * 'read_only' was removed from configuration-groups and moved to cluster{} because forcing the user to create a configuration-group for every MySQL slave is arduous and a poor user experience.
 * 'read_only' is only permitted if 'slave_of' is set, otherwise the request will be failed.
 * Opinion: 'read_only' should default to true if slave_of is set and read_only is not provided.
 * Note: 'slave_of' is purposefully not an array to support multi-source replication coming in 5.7. Instead, a new 'channels'-like field will be introduced.
 * For now, 'slave_of' requires a vanilla trove instance uuid, but will inevitably need to be prefixed with namespacing to support multiple dcs and sources (e.g. trove:us-west:tenant_id:instance:dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998) and/or additional fields will be added.
 * Note: The master could have optionally included instance.cluster{} to provide a cluster_name to avoid it being the same as the master's name (see below for context)

Show Instance
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "ACTIVE", "updated": "2014-02-16T03:38:49" "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "products", "datastore": { "version": "5.5", "type": "mysql", },   "flavor": { "id": "7", "links": [{...}] },   "configuration": { "id": "b9c8a3f8-7ace-4aea-9908-7b555586d7b6", "name": "config-a", "links": [{...}] } } } Request:

GET /instances/061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "ACTIVE", "updated": "2014-02-16T03:38:49" "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "datastore": { "version": "5.5", "type": "mysql", },   "flavor": { "id": "7", "links": [{...}] },   "cluster": { "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "read_only": true },   "configuration": { "id": "b9c8a3f8-7ace-4aea-9908-7b555586d7b6", "name": "config-a", "links": [{...}] } } }

Show Cluster
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

Response:

{ "cluster": { "name": "products", "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "products" },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "read_only": true }   ]  } }

Remove Replication (aka "Promote" to Standalone)
Request:

POST or PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster/action or POST or PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "promote": { "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859" } }

Response:

TBD

Notes:
 * The PUT /cluster option is more "correct", but POST /action is already an established pattern in the codebase. We must choose one of the four approaches. For the sake of brevity, it is assumed that PUT /cluster is chosen (and will be used in examples beyond this point in the document)

Create Single Instance Replica-Set
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-a", ...   "datastore": { "type": "mongodb", "version": "2.4.10" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "instance_type": "member", "join": false },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", ... } } Notes:
 * The existing instance-create payload for single instance MongoDB will be treated exactly the same as this example (with instance.name becoming cluster_name, instance_type defaulting to member, and join defaulting to false)
 * 'cluster_name' is used as 'replSet'
 * Enforce 'cluster_name' field to be provided for MongoDB, even in the case of a standalone/single instance. See http://www.mongodb.com/blog/post/dont-let-your-standalone-mongodb-server-stand-alone for reasoning.
 * 'join' indicates whether you're joining an existing replica-set, or creating a new one. If 'join' is false, and an active replica-set by that name for the tenant already exists, the request will be failed. 'join' by default will be false, but was included above for illustrative purposes.
 * 'instance_type' is 'member' vs. 'primary' because in a replica-set, the primary is dynamic and can change in an election.

Create 3 Instance Replica-Set
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "", ...   "datastore": { "type": "mongodb", "version": "2.4.10" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "instance_type": "member", "num_instances": 3, "join": false },   ...  } }

Response:

{ TBD } Notes:
 * cluster.num_instances defaults to 1
 * instance.name cannot be provided if instance.cluster.num_instances != 1 (implicitly or explicitly)
 * cluster.num_instances is not supported for mysql and possibly others (see the Summary table at the bottom of this document)
 * the names of the instances for num_instances != 1 will be " - ", where suffix is either an incrementing number (e.g. product-1, product-2) or some variation thereof.
 * it's understood that num_instances itself will not be sufficient in the future because users will want to split the allocation across different availability-zones. tying num_instance split allocations to az(s) and/or region(s) is beyond the scope of this first iteration, and therefore, all nodes will land as they would land today (az/region-wise). it's worth pointing out that building node by node vs. using the convenience of num_instances is a workaround.

Add Member to Replica-Set
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", ...   "cluster": { "instance_type": "member", "cluster_name": "products", "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", ... } } Notes:
 * If 'join' is true, and there is no existing replica-set for the tenant matching the 'cluster_name' value, the request will be failed.
 * Will have to use 'db.isMaster' to determine the current primary to execute replica-set commands against (since it can be dynamic due to elections)
 * Will use http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/expand-replica-set/#configure-and-add-a-member
 * Should protect against adding more than 12 members to a replica-set
 * Should protect against adding more than 7 voting members to a replica-set
 * Should return warning when number of voting members is even and there is no arbiter

Add Another Member to Replica-Set
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-c", ...   "cluster": { "instance_type": "member", "cluster_name": "products", "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", ... } }

Show Instance
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998

Response:

{ "instance": { ...   "cluster": { "instance_type": "member", "cluster_name": "products" },   ...  } }

Show Cluster
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

Response:

{ "cluster": { "name": "products", "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "product-a", "instance_type": "member" },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "instance_type": "member" },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "name": "product-c", "instance_type": "member" }   ]  } }

Add Arbiter
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-arbiter", ...   "cluster": { "instance_type": "arbiter", "cluster_name": "products", "join": true },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "a1b62aaa-7863-4384-8250-59024141c1f8", ... } }

Add a Delayed Member
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-delayed", ...   "cluster": { "instance_type": "member", "cluster_name": "products", "priority": 0, "hidden": true, "slaveDelay": 3600, "join": true },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "7d8eb019-931b-4b2a-88d2-4c9f0ca1b29e", ... } } Notes:
 * 'instance_type', 'cluster_name', 'join', 'priority', 'hidden', and 'slaveDelay' are the only fields supported in cluster{} for mongodb. All other configuration values must be set via a configuration-group. After more thought, consider supporting 'hostname' and 'votes' as well.
 * Why isn't 'priority', 'hidden' and 'slaveDelay' in a configuration-group you ask? This is explained in "Modifying a Replica-Set" below.

Modifying a Replica-Set
Thus far we've been able to model building a replica-set, adding an arbiter, adding a delayed secondary member, etc. Let's continue with how to modify a replica-set. Example:

cfg = rs.conf cfg.members[0].priority = 2 cfg.members[1].priority = 1 cfg.members[2].priority = 0.5 cfg.members[3].priority = 0 rs.reconfig(cfg)
 * 1) from http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/configure-secondary-only-replica-set-member/#example

Executing these priority changes one at a time can have catastrophic results, so it must be done as a transaction (with rs.reconfig commiting). However, without the ability to address the cluster (i.e. multiple members at once), this becomes impossible. The only backdoor solution would be to guarantee that the MongoDB user(s) presented to the cloud tenant all have the clusterAdmin role, as this would allow them to connect to the primary and execute such transactions themselves via the native client. Obviously however, granting clusterAdmin to every DBaaS user in MongoDB is unacceptable in most deployments. The solution is as follows: Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster { "update_member_attributes": { "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "priority": 2 },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "priority": 1 },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "priority": 0.5 }   ]  } } Notes:
 * 'update_member_attributes.members[]' elements will only permit 'priority', 'hidden', and 'slaveDelay' (possibly 'votes' and 'hostname' as mentioned earlier).
 * See https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Trove/Replication-And-Clustering&action=submit#Replica-Set_Member_Type.2FAttribute_Updates for a list of approaches considered.

Remove a Member
Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "promote": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } } Notes:
 * Note that 'promote' was used here vs. "remove_member" because the action is akin to promoting a mysql/redis slave instance (see http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/method/rs.remove/#rs.remove)
 * See https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Trove/Replication-And-Clustering&action=submit#Remove_a_Member_from_a_Replica-Set for a list of approaches considered.

MongoDB TokuMX

 * TokuMUX will require a new datastore-version and *possibly* a new manager class (same reasoning as why Tungsten/Galera will have their own datastore-version for MySQL)

Create Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-a", ...   "datastore": { "type": "cassandra", "version": "cassandra-2.0.5" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": true, "endpoint_snitch": "RackInferringSnitch", "join": false },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", ... } } Notes:
 * Unlike in MongoDB, the 'instance_type' field is not required (because all instances of the cluster are of the same type)
 * 'cluster_name', 'num_tokens', and 'is_seed' are always required, with 'endpoint_snitch' being required if 'join' is false (if 'join' is true, the endpoint_snitch is inherited) and 'auto_bootstrap' required if 'join' is true.
 * 'seed_provider' can optionally be provided, but conveniently defaults to 'org.apache.cassandra.locator.SimpleSeedProvider'
 * 'join' indicates whether you're joining an existing cluster, or creating a new one. If 'join' is false, and an active cluster by that name for the tenant already exists, the request will be failed. 'join' by default will be false, but was included above for illustrative purposes.
 * Likely the Keystone region and the availability-zone inherent to the trove request can be used for the data-center and rack (cassandra-topology.properties), but if it turns out that the naming schemes are incompatible, 'data_center' and 'rack' can be introduced.
 * 'is_seed' is used vs. a seed list of ip-addresses because (1) the ip-address is not yet known and (2) when additional seeds are added, each instance in the cluster must be notified and updated. More on this later.

Add Instance to Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", ...   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": false, "auto_bootstrap": false, "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", ... } } Notes:
 * If 'join' is true, and there is no existing cluster for the tenant matching the 'cluster_name' value, the request will be failed.
 * If 'endpoint_snitch' is provided, and the value does not match that of the existing instances(s) in the cluster, the request will be failed.

Add Another Instance to Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-c", ...   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": false, "auto_bootstrap": false, "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", ... } }

Show Instance
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998

Response:

{ "instance": { ...   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": true },   ...  } }

Show Cluster
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

Response:

{ "cluster": { "name": "products", "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "product-a", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": true },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": false },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "name": "product-c", "num_tokens": 256, "is_seed": false }   ]  } }

Modifying a Cluster
Example: Drain (http://www.datastax.com/documentation/cassandra/2.0/cassandra/tools/toolsDrain.html)

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster { "drain": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } }

Remove an Instance
Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster { "promote": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } } Notes:
 * Note that 'promote' was used here vs. "remove/decomm_instance" because the action is akin to promoting a mysql/redis slave instance (see https://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/Operations#Removing_nodes_entirely)

Create Cluster
Create Initial Cluster Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-a", ...   "datastore": { "type": "couchbase", "version": "2.5.1" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "join": false },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", ... } } Notes:
 * Couchbase does not support a "cluster name", but does require a xdcr-cluster-name when using XDCR.
 * Tip: Summary of operations at http://docs.couchbase.com/couchbase-manual-2.2/#xdcr-replicate-options

Add Instance to Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", ...   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", ... } } Notes:
 * If 'join' is true, and there is no existing cluster for the tenant matching the 'cluster_name' value, the request will be failed.
 * In Couchbase, a new instance can join the cluster by referencing any existing instance, which is discoverable by trove via the cluster_name (unique per tenant)

Add Another Instance to Cluster
Request/Response omitted due to a lack of any special considerations required

Show Instance
Request/Response omitted due to a lack of any special considerations required

Show Cluster
Request/Response omitted due to a lack of any special considerations required

Modifying a Cluster
Example: Create Bucket

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "create_bucket": { "bucket": "test_bucket", "bucket_type": "couchbase", "bucket_port": 11222, "bucket_ramsize": 200, "bucket_replica": 1 } }

Remove a Instance
Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "failover": { "ids": ["dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998"], "rebalance": true } } Notes:
 * As noted in the Couchbase documentation, removing an instance is akin to a failover and has extreme impliciations. For this reason, "promote" was not used (that, and "rebalance" is optional.)

Create Master
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "products", ...   "datastore": { "type": "redis", "version": "2.8.6" },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", ... } } Notes:
 * cluster{} is not required for redis
 * note: 'join' field is not required for redis. also notice the lack of a 'cluster_name' of sorts (see 'Add Slave' for reasoning)

Add Slave
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", ...   "datastore": { "type": "redis", "version": "2.8.6" },   "cluster": { "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", ... } } Notes:
 * redis supports daisy-chaining slaves, therefore the 'slave_of' value needs to be a specific trove instance uuid vs. a manufactured 'cluster_name' of sorts.
 * whether it is a master or slave can be inferred from the presence (or lack thereof) of 'slave_of'.
 * note that 'slave_of' is also used for mysql (the datastore information will have to be used to determine the semantic difference)

Show Instance
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998

Response:

{ "instance": { ... } }

Show Cluster
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

Response:

{ "cluster": { "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "products" },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" }   ]  } }

Promote/Disconnect Slave
Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "promote": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } } Notes:
 * note that 'promote' is also used for mysql (the datastore information will have to be used to determine the semantic difference)

Create Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-a", ...   "datastore": { "type": "redis", "version": "3.0.0-beta1" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "join": false },   ...  } }

Response:

{ "instance": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", ... } } Notes:
 * Will require datastore-version (to 'manager' to cluster{}) validation that cluster_name is supported for redis (because redis 3.x supports clusters, whereas 2.x does not)
 * 'cluster-node-timeout' should be handled by configuration by the deployer (outside the context of configuration-group).
 * Note: shares 'cluster_name' with Cassandra.

Add Another Master to Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-b", ...   "datastore": { "type": "redis", "version": "3.0.0-beta1" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "join": true },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", ... } }

Add Slave to Cluster
Request:

POST /instances { "instance": { "name": "product-c", ...   "datastore": { "type": "redis", "version": "3.0.0-beta1" },   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products", "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" },   ...  } } Response: { "instance": { "status": "BUILD", "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", ... } } Notes:
 * Despite redis clusters supporting the ability to add a slave without designating the master, we will require it to avoid unoptimal geographical relationships.

Show Instance
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998

Response:

{ "instance": { ...   "cluster": { "cluster_name": "products" },   ...  } }

Show Cluster
Request:

GET /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

Response:

{ "cluster": { "name": "products", "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "product-a" },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b" },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "name": "product-c", "slave_of": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" }   ]  } }

Promote/Disconnect Slave
Work in Progress

Summary of Route Changes
New Route: GET /instances//node/ { "node": { "status": " ", "id": "", "name": " ", "created": " ", "updated": " ", "links": [{...}], "ip": [""], //or hostname, depending on conf "volume": { "size": , "used": } } } New Route: POST /instances//node//action { " ": {     } }

Open Questions

 * How to handle additional filtering requirements for instance-list (need to likely filter by cluster_name, so how to handle mysql/redis in these scenarios).

Replica-Set Member Type/Attribute Updates
Option #1: PATCH /instances/:id/cluster Request:

PATCH /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "instances": [ {     "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "priority": 2 },   {      "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "priority": 1 },   {      "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "priority": 0.5 } ] }

Response:

{ "cluster": { "name": "products", "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "name": "product-a", "instance_type": "member" },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "name": "product-b", "instance_type": "member" },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "name": "product-c", "instance_type": "member" }   ]  } } Notes: Option #2: POST /instances/:id/cluster/action Request:
 * An HTTP PATCH vs. PUT because the omission of a field should not be an indication to drop/delete it.
 * All modified fields in a request will be changed transactionally in a single rs.reconfig.
 * It should now be clear why 'priority', 'hidden' and 'slaveDelay' are in cluster{} vs. a configuration-group: when a configuration-group is changed, an event is immediately triggered to update any attached trove instances. Therefore, if you have a heterogeneous mixture of configuration-groups in a replica-set, there is no way to coordinate a consolidated rs.reconfig.
 * Downside: cluster{} may have fields returned on a GET that you cannot change in a PATCH/PUT; re-worded, the granularity of what is permissible to change in a PATCH becomes complicated to check and validate.
 * TBD on what should be returned in the cluster{} on a GET /instance/:id and GET /instance/:id/cluster. It's a question of whether we should persist anything beyond the 'instance_type' and 'cluster_name'. If say the 'priority' is stored, you introduce the possibility of drift from the truth, but can easily return it on a GET; if it's not stored, do we prompt MongoDB for the truth on a GET, or is that too computationally expensive?

POST or PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster/action or POST or PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "update_member_attributes": { "instances": [ {       "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", "priority": 2 },     {        "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", "priority": 1 },     {        "id": "3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782", "priority": 0.5 }   ]  } } Notes: Decision: Option #2 is more fine-grained, easier to reason about, and less error-prone. As you'll see in later operations (like Remove a Member), is also more appropriate.
 * 'update_member_attributes.members[]' elements will only permit 'priority', 'hidden', and 'slaveDelay' (possibly 'votes' and 'hostname' as mentioned earlier).
 * Due to the limited field-set, this approach is much more fine-grained than the PATCH approach in Option #1.

Remove a Member from a Replica-Set
Removing a member from a cluster/cluster is not the same as deleting one, therefore DELETE /instances/:id is not appropriate. Option #1: PUT /instances/:id/cluster Request:

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "instances": [ {     "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998", },   {      "id": "061aaf4c-3a57-411e-9df9-2d0f813db859", } ] } Notes: Summary: Not very clean, mildly confusing, and very error-prone (nowhere is a "remove" action ever explicitly implied). Option #2: POST /instances/:id/cluster/action Request:
 * By omitting a member{} for id=3a72ee87-cf3e-40f1-a1e1-fe8c7263a782 in a PUT operation, this indicates the member should be removed from the replica-set.
 * It's possible that one might want to modify the 'priority', 'hidden', 'votes', etc. fields of the remaining members while dropping a member. So although the example above does not show it, mongodb{} can be included in a member to indicate other changes, *BUT*, since it's a PUT the expectation of what happens to omitted fields in mongodb{} becomes unclear.

PUT /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster

{ "remove_member": { "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } } Notes: Summary: Fairly clean, with no real drawbacks. Option #3: POST /instances/:id/cluster/remove POST /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster/remove
 * The 'remove_member' action is explicit here, vs. implicit as seen in the prior example.
 * 'remove_member' has a strict set of fields that are supported, so there is no question as to what can be provided and what will be honored (as compared to Option #1).
 * Note: Could rename remove_member here to 'promote'!

{ "id": "dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998" } Notes: Summary: At first glance it might look cleaner than Option #2 from a payload-perspective, but the URI discoverability and expansion is awful. Option #4: POST /instances/:id/action POST /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/action
 * Differs from Option #2 in that the action is in the URI vs. the payload (which is considered incorrect in REST due to it being a verb)
 * One drawback of this approach is that not every action will be supported across all datastores. So for example, a POST /instances/:id/cluster/changeoplogsize (http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/change-oplog-size/) makes absolutely no sense to any datastore other than MongoDB.

{ "join": false } Notes: Summary: For this very specific example it looks great, but isn't expressive enough for other actions. Option #5: POST /instances/:id/cluster/:id/action POST /instances/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/cluster/dfbbd9ca-b5e1-4028-adb7-f78643e17998/action
 * Executed against the instance you wish to remove itself from the cluster, so providing the 'id' in the payload is unnecessary.
 * Drawback: There are actions that are replica-set-wide (or against a subset of the replica-set), meaning Option #1 or #2 or #3 would have to co-exist with this option anyway.
 * Drawback: Increase the number of ways to accomplish the same thing (could unjoin against /instances/:id/action, or against /instances/:id/cluster)

{ "remove": {} } Notes: Summary: Fairly clean with no real drawbacks.
 * The /instances/:id is an arbitrary member in the replica-set, it doesn't matter which one; the cluster/:id is then a member of said replica-set that this action will be applied to.
 * Executed against the instance you wish to remove itself from the cluster, so providing the 'id' in the payload is unnecessary.
 * Needs More Thought: Could conceivably allow only specific operations here (like remove/unjoin), but not others that could be accomplished in a PATCH against /instances/:id/cluster (like 'priority', 'hidden', etc.)