aurora-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Farner (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (AURORA-1948) Adding instances leads to constraints conflict
Date Thu, 21 Sep 2017 02:08:02 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1948?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16174119#comment-16174119
] 

Bill Farner commented on AURORA-1948:
-------------------------------------

A few things come to mind for me.  Brain dump here:

- constraints are stored in `TaskConfig`, which is sent to the executor and saved.  ideally,
the executor would never receive this information since it is irrelevant.  however, it is
a potential source of confusion if the scheduler independently changes the value

- this breaks into new territory by having the scheduler determine specific fields in a `TaskConfig`
that do not result in an instance reboot.  in this case, it should be trivially accomplished
by detecting that a change is isolated to the constraints, and re-running the constraint matcher
against existing instances.

> Adding instances leads to constraints conflict
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AURORA-1948
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1948
>             Project: Aurora
>          Issue Type: Story
>          Components: Scheduler
>            Reporter: Vladimir
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Problem: 
> When scaling instances (adding more instances) there could be a constraint conflict.
> Example:
> Let's say you have a mesos cluster with 3 racks. You want to deploy a service and create
aurora job with the "rack" constraint "limit" set to 1. So basically it means that no more
than 1 instance per rack. The job has number of instances set to 2, for example. The deployment
will succeed and user would get 2 instances running on 2 different racks. 
> Next user would like to scale it to 4 instances by adding 2 more instances. In this case
if user won't update the rack constraint (set limit to 2 or larger), the update job would
fail showing "Limit not satisfied: rack". If user would modify the constraints, then the regular
Job update would be involved which would add new instances but also update the existing ones
(rolling deploy). 
> Proposal:
> The proposal is to be able to update the constraints while adding new instances in order
to satisfy the limits and be sure that the currently running instances won't be redeployed.
> So in my example, when scaling up we can recalculate the rack limit on our end, update
it's value in the job config, update number of instances and start job update. Aurora would
leave 2 currently running instances as they are and only add two new instances making sure
that the new constraints are satisfied..



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Mime
View raw message