Deploying On-Premises Backend Servers to GCP: A Native Approach
Question
Your company's web server administrator is migrating on-premises backend servers for an application to GCP.
Libraries and configurations differ significantly across these backend servers.
The migration to GCP will be lift-and-shift, and all requests to the servers will be served by a single network load balancer frontend.
You want to use a GCP-native solution when possible.
How should you deploy this service in GCP?
Answers
Explanations
Click on the arrows to vote for the correct answer
A. B. C. D.B.
https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instance-groups/adding-an-instance-group-to-a-load-balancerOption A: Create a managed instance group from one of the images of the on-premises servers, and link this instance group to a target pool behind your load balancer.
This option involves creating a managed instance group from an image of one of the on-premises servers and then linking this instance group to a target pool behind the network load balancer. The instance group can be configured to autoscale based on the incoming traffic. This option would allow for easy migration to GCP and minimal configuration changes. However, the different configurations and libraries on the on-premises servers may result in compatibility issues and inconsistencies.
Option B: Create a target pool, add all backend instances to this target pool, and deploy the target pool behind your load balancer.
In this option, a target pool is created, and all backend instances are added to it. This target pool is then deployed behind the network load balancer. This option allows for flexibility in choosing the backend instances and managing them. It also allows for easy scaling and upgrading of the backend instances. However, the different configurations and libraries on the on-premises servers may result in compatibility issues and inconsistencies.
Option C: Deploy a third-party virtual appliance as a frontend to these servers that will accommodate the significant differences between these backend servers.
This option involves deploying a third-party virtual appliance as a frontend to the on-premises servers to accommodate the significant differences between the backend servers. This option can provide more flexibility in managing the servers and configurations, but it can also introduce additional complexity and potential compatibility issues.
Option D: Use GCP's ECMP capability to load-balance traffic to the backend servers by installing multiple equal-priority static routes to the backend servers.
In this option, GCP's ECMP (Equal-Cost Multipath) capability is used to load-balance traffic to the backend servers by installing multiple equal-priority static routes to the backend servers. This option provides a simple and efficient way to load-balance traffic across the backend servers. However, it may not be suitable for complex configurations or configurations that require specific routing rules.
In summary, Option B is the recommended option as it provides the flexibility to manage the backend instances and allows for easy scaling and upgrading of the backend instances. However, the chosen option should be based on the specific requirements and configurations of the on-premises servers.
