feat: move runner scaling to the provisioner #3529
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was referenced Nov 26, 2024
Open
Open
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
from
e106941
to
273f4d2
Compare
stuartwdouglas
added
the
run-all
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
15 times, most recently
from
06b5022
to
0b0f22d
Compare
stuartwdouglas
requested review from
wesbillman
and removed request for
a team
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
3 times, most recently
from
0aa9ae0
to
ba315f2
Compare
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
5 times, most recently
from
d36b8f2
to
ae351a3
Compare
jvmakine
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2024
| @@ -149,6 +150,8 @@ func replaceOutputs(to []*provproto.Resource, from []*provproto.Resource) error | |||
| } | |||
| r.Subscription.Output = subscriptionFrom.Subscription.Output | |||
| } | |||
| case *provproto.Resource_Runner: | |||
| // Ignore | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why ignoring here? Should we not just set the outpus?
backend/provisioner/registry.go
Outdated
| @@ -273,9 +276,18 @@ func ExtractResources(msg *ftlv1.CreateDeploymentRequest) (*ResourceGraph, error | |||
| to: dep.ResourceId, | |||
| }) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| runnerResource := &provisioner.Resource{ | |||
| ResourceId: module.GetName() + "-runner", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we use deployment id here instead? I think that would fit better to the given model, given that each deployment has a separate runner as a resource.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually we don't really seem to have the deployment name here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, yeah. I think it currently created after the provisioning, which is annoying. I suppose that is fine for now, though it breaks the model a bit.
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
2 times, most recently
from
074deb9
to
7eb038e
Compare
stuartwdouglas
force-pushed
the
stuartwdouglas/provision-runners
branch
from
7eb038e
to
d54b736
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fixes #3483