Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Nomad Restart and Reschedule Policy #611

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024
Merged

Nomad Restart and Reschedule Policy #611

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024

Conversation

mpass99
Copy link
Contributor

@mpass99 mpass99 commented Jun 12, 2024

Related to #587

Fix restart and reschedule configuration to not reschedule infinitely (e.g. due to an invalid image specifier).

ToDo:

  • Should we write an e2e test checking that a wrong environment definition does not loop infinitely? With the current configuration, the test will last almost 10 minutes.. No

@mpass99 mpass99 self-assigned this Jun 12, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 76.98%. Comparing base (3a22c30) to head (2dd0d16).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #611      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   76.92%   76.98%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          41       41              
  Lines        3498     3498              
==========================================
+ Hits         2691     2693       +2     
+ Misses        592      590       -2     
  Partials      215      215              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@mpass99 mpass99 force-pushed the fix/#587-restart-policy branch from 0964910 to 7b9cd3f Compare June 12, 2024 19:19
@mpass99 mpass99 requested a review from MrSerth June 12, 2024 19:28
Copy link
Member

@MrSerth MrSerth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

I would not add an e2e for this scenario. We would mainly test Nomad (and not something truly Poseidon specific), which doesn't feel right. Further the long increase is really not ideal. If at all, I would opt to add another template job with shorter wait times specifically for the given scenario. Still, I don't think it's the right thing to do...

@mpass99 mpass99 marked this pull request as ready for review June 21, 2024 13:31
mpass99 added 2 commits June 27, 2024 16:41
because our current Poseidon-Nomad architecture has a 1:1 runner-job relationship and there is no need to have more than the one task per job.
to limit the number of reschedules as we cannot guarantee an error-free job definition.
We also set reasonable delays and intervals to increase the likelihood that one deployment has enough time, but there is no second deployment within the interval.
@MrSerth MrSerth force-pushed the fix/#587-restart-policy branch from 7b9cd3f to 2dd0d16 Compare June 27, 2024 14:41
@MrSerth MrSerth enabled auto-merge (rebase) June 27, 2024 14:43
@MrSerth MrSerth merged commit 8f819de into main Jun 27, 2024
12 checks passed
@MrSerth MrSerth deleted the fix/#587-restart-policy branch June 27, 2024 14:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants