Expose Databases on Kubernetes with Ingress

Ingress is a resource that is commonly used to expose HTTP(s) services outside of Kubernetes. To have ingress support, you will need an Ingress Controller, which in a nutshell is a proxy. SREs and DevOps love ingress as it provides developers with a self-service to expose their applications. Developers love it as it is simple to use, but at the same time quite flexible.

High-level ingress design looks like this: 

1. Users connect through a single Load Balancer or other Kubernetes service
2. Traffic is routed through Ingress Pod (or Pods for high availability)

   • There are multiple flavors of Ingress Controllers. Some use nginx, some envoy, or other proxies. See a curated list of Ingress Controllers here.

3. Based on HTTP headers traffic is routed to corresponding Pods which run websites. For HTTPS traffic Server Name Indication (SNI) is used, which is an extension in TLS supported by most browsers. Usually, ingress controller integrates nicely with cert-manager, which provides you with full TLS lifecycle support (yeah, no need to worry about renewals anymore).

The beauty and value of such a design is that you have a single Load Balancer serving all your websites. In Public Clouds, it leads to cost savings, and in private clouds, it simplifies your networking or reduces the number of IPv4 addresses (if you are not on IPv6 yet). 

TCP and UDP with Ingress

Quite interestingly, some ingress controllers also support TCP and UDP proxying. I have been asked on our forum and Kubernetes slack multiple times if it is possible to use ingress with Percona Operators. Well, it is. Usually, you need a load balancer per database cluster: 

The design with ingress is going to be a bit more complicated but still allows you to utilize the single load balancer for multiple databases. In cases where you run hundreds of clusters, it leads to significant cost savings. 

1. Each TCP port represents the database cluster
2. Ingress Controller makes a decision about where to route the traffic based on the port

The obvious downside of this design is non-default TCP ports for databases. There might be weird cases where it can turn into a blocker, but usually, it should not.

Hands-on

My goal is to have the following:

• Kubernetes 1.21 (I will use civo.com, but it should work on any other managed or private k8s)
• Expose three MySQL clusters managed by Percona Operator for MySQL through ingress-nginx

  • Each cluster on a separate port

All configuration files I used for this blog post can be found in this Github repository.

Deploy Percona XtraDB Clusters (PXC)

The following commands are going to deploy the Operator and three clusters:

Deploy Ingress

This is going to deploy a highly available ingress-nginx controller. 

• controller.replicaCount=2 – defines that we want to have at least two Pods of ingress controller. This is to provide a highly available setup.
• tcp flags do two things:

  • expose ports 3306-3308 on the ingress’s load balancer
  • instructs ingress controller to forward traffic to corresponding services which were created by Percona Operator for PXC clusters. For example, port 3307 is the one to use to connect to minimal-cluster2. Read more about this configuration in ingress documentation.

Here is the load balancer resource that was created:

As you see, ports 3306-3308 are exposed.

Check the Connection

This is it. Database clusters should be exposed and reachable. Let’s check the connection. 

Get the root password for minimal-cluster2:

Connect to the database:

It works! Notice how I use port 3307, which corresponds to minimal-cluster2.

Adding More Clusters

What if you add more clusters into the picture, how do you expose those?

Helm

If you use helm, the easiest way is to just add one more flag into the command:

No helm

Without Helm, it is a two-step process:

First, edit the configMap which configures TCP services exposure. By default it is called ingress-nginx-tcp:

Change in configMap will trigger the reconfiguration of nginx in ingress pods. But as a second step, it is also necessary to expose this port on a load balancer. To do so – edit the corresponding service:

The new cluster is exposed on port 3309 now.

Limitations and considerations

Ports per Load Balancer

Cloud providers usually limit the number of ports that you can expose through a single load balancer:

• AWS has 50 listeners per NLB, GCP 100 ports per service.

If you hit the limit, just create another load balancer pointing to the ingress controller.

Automation

Cost-saving is a good thing, but with Kubernetes capabilities, users expect to avoid manual tasks, not add more. Integrating the change of ingress configMap and load balancer ports into CICD is not a hard task, but maintaining the logic of adding new load balancers to add more ports is harder. I have not found any projects that implement the logic of reusing load balancer ports or automating it in any way. If you know of any – please leave a comment under this blog post.