Deprecate AvailabilitySet based clusters #396
Labels
area/robustness
Robustness, reliability, resilience related
kind/enhancement
Enhancement, improvement, extension
kind/roadmap
Roadmap BLI
kind/technical-debt
Something that is only solved on the surface, but requires more (re)work to be done properly
lifecycle/rotten
Nobody worked on this for 12 months (final aging stage)
platform/azure
Microsoft Azure platform/infrastructure
priority/2
Priority (lower number equals higher priority)
status/blocked
Issue is blocked (e.g. because of dependencies)
How to categorize this issue?
/area robustness
/kind technical-debt
/priority 2
/platform azure
What would you like to be added:
We are currently using AvailabilitySets to ensure that machines get distributed across compute units for non zonal deployments (primarily in regions which does not consists of multiple zones).
Due to legacy reasons we use just one single AvailabilitySets for all machines in the cluster (even with multiple worker pools). This approach come with several drawbacks (basic load balancer, no different hardware skus etc.).
Therefore we started already a while ago to support also Azure cluster based on VirtualMachineScaleSets with flexible orchestration (VMSS flex/VMO). So far this was just useable as an alpha feature (activated via annotation
alpha.azure.provider.extensions.gardener.cloud/vmo=true
on Shoot resource) as the feature was not general available on Azure.As the VirtualMachineScaleSets with flexible orchestration feature now turned GA on Azure we should start and make it the default for non zonal deployments. Ref
This is an umbrella issue to track what need to be done to deprecate (probably first forbid to create new?) AvailabilitySet based clusters and to install VMSS flex as new default deployment model for non-zonal clusters. Goal should be to get rid of the AvailabilitySet deployment model entirely at a certain point in time.
Why is this needed:
More robust/flexible machine distribution support in non zonal regions.
cc @kon-angelo, @MSSedusch, @HappyTobi
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: