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

Rescheduling: Always set availability zone to target host #282

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 4, 2025

Conversation

BenjaminLudwigSAP
Copy link
Collaborator

When a LB DB entry is rewritten after it has been rescheduled, it can be considered expected behavior to also adjust the availability zone.

Tested in QA with both cases; Rescheduling to an AZ-aware device and rescheduling away from an AZ-aware device.

@BenjaminLudwigSAP
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The force push was to retrigger the Python Package workflow, because I believed the error to be temporary.
However, it is an error in the workflow definition itself, which I addressed in PR #283, which needs to be merged first.

Copy link
Contributor

@velp velp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@BenjaminLudwigSAP
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Merged stable/yoga-m3 for build workflow fix.

Copy link
Collaborator

@notandy notandy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The revert task doesn't change the availability zone back, a scheduling error would leave the lb in the wrong AZ.

Don't log the current LB's AZ, since that would be one additional DB
query, and the new AZ has already been logged by the execute method.
@BenjaminLudwigSAP BenjaminLudwigSAP merged commit 884b872 into stable/yoga-m3 Feb 4, 2025
3 checks passed
@BenjaminLudwigSAP BenjaminLudwigSAP deleted the rescheduling-az branch February 4, 2025 08:38
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.

4 participants