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

release-23.1: roachprod: add aws AZ override for c6id.24xlarge #105248

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 22, 2023

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Jun 21, 2023

Backport 1/1 commits from #105234 on behalf of @srosenberg.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


Since the bump to new instance types in GCE and AWS [1], we are still experiencing occasional cluster creation issues owing to "insufficient capacity". GCE quota has already been bumped, with asia-northeast1 being the latest, and hopefully last.

The most recent cluster creation in AWS is owing to "insufficient capacity" of c6id.24xlarge in us-east-2a. As a workaround, we extend the existing zone override to place c6id.24xlarge into us-east-2b, which
allegedly has sufficient capacity.

Note, the long-term fix is to rework how cluster creation retry currently operates, by effectively trying other AZs.

[1] #104419

Epic: none
Fixes: #78601 (comment)

Release note: None


Release justification: test/ci only change

Since the bump to new instance types in GCE and AWS [1],
we are still experiencing occasional cluster creation
issues owing to "insufficient capacity". GCE quota has
already been bumped, with `asia-northeast1` being the
latest, and hopefully last.

The most recent cluster creation in AWS is owing to
"insufficient capacity" of `c6id.24xlarge` in us-east-2a.
As a workaround, we extend the existing zone override
to place `c6id.24xlarge` into us-east-2b, which
allegedly has sufficient capacity.

Note, the long-term fix is to rework how cluster creation
retry currently operates, by effectively trying other AZs.

[1] #104419

Epic: none
Fixes: #78601 (comment)

Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 21, 2023 01:16
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from herkolategan and srosenberg and removed request for a team June 21, 2023 01:16
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-23.1-105234 branch from a41fd59 to 982f1e1 Compare June 21, 2023 01:16
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Jun 21, 2023
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Jun 21, 2023

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
  • Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Patches should change as little code as possible.
  • Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Patches should not add new functionality.
  • Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

  • What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
  • Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
  • If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-23.1-105234 branch from e013b41 to f0252ac Compare June 21, 2023 01:16
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from renatolabs and smg260 June 21, 2023 01:16
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@srosenberg srosenberg merged commit dba36f4 into release-23.1 Jun 22, 2023
@srosenberg srosenberg deleted the blathers/backport-release-23.1-105234 branch June 22, 2023 03:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants