Idea ID: 1683637

One On-Premise Bridge for multiple tenants, or provider tenant share opb

Status : Waiting for Votes
over 2 years ago

Currently, if a smax tenant wants to utilize OPB, it is recommended to have a dedicated server just for the opb.

When handling mulitple customers in one environment, each instance of the OPB can only connect to one tenant. Which means if you are running a provider tenant with many managed tenants, it is recommended that each opb has its own dedicated server.

This can be a lot of resources to ask for, given that opb is usually running periodically. Why not allow multiple tenants to be able to utilize one opb (maybe max 3).

or if the provider tenant has an opb setup, why not let the managed tenants utilize the same opb agent.

 

You have to specify different credentials anyway, so why not allow multiples.

 

Tags:

  • We know that there is no way to connect multiple offices with one OPB,
    Multiple OPB is a waste of resources, and this ER has been proposed by many people.

    That hope will improve in the future.

  • We also using multiple Tenants but we also facing same issue, it would be better if we can use only one OPB for all the tenants. Please check internally and update it in next version.

  •   We are also using multiple tenants and want to configure the OPB for each tenant. How did you install two OPB in single machine ?

    can you please share the steps here

  • If  port choice could be given at install time and environment variables could be tweaked instead of having constants like "wrapper" to "wrapper_1". This could be done. But should be officially supported.

    In comparison service-now  "mid-server" (similar functionality)  out of the box can have multiple instances on same machine(services, ports and logs included from install separation).  This limitation is a problem when using multi-tenants.

  • Hi igirvan,

    interesting approach to run multiple OPB agents on one machine. I am interersted in doing the same, also on a Windows server.

    How exactly did you manage to rename the service (config file?)? Did you then rename the first service before installing the 2nd?

    What is meant by 'subtle path tweeks'?

    Is it from your point of view a stable solution, worth to loose the official support?

     

    Thanks and BR
    Niklas