Persisted shared ports during inplace update

[drewbailey]

Ensure that allocation AllocatedResources Shared Ports are not dropped during inplace updates.

When performing in place updates, the scheduler creates a shallow copy of the allocation and updates a few fields. It's not immediately clear to me why we do a shallow copy instead of something like allocation.Copy(). The AllocatedSharedResources Ports were not copied over causing issues after the plan was applied.

As a side effect, removing or updating a task group service stanza, resulting in an inplace update would error and prevent a service from being registered or deregistered during an inplace update. This issue was reported in #9360

This error was displayed in the logs like so:

    2021-01-06T12:49:47.127-0500 [ERROR] client.alloc_runner: error running update hooks: alloc_id=13ff640d-7426-4763-1be1-427a3594dec3 error="1 error occurred:
        * update hook "group_services" failed: error getting address for check "service: \"example-service\" check": invalid port "api": port label not found
"

fixes #9360
fixes #9735

[nickethier]

🎉

[drewbailey]

@nickethier pining if you happen to know, but noticed networks was dropped too, I'm guessing we want to carry over all fields

[nickethier]

I think so, but I think we'd want a copy of it. I wonder if we should just set Shared on line 730 to update.Alloc.AllocatedResources.Shared.Copy()?

[drewbailey]

Yeah, its not clear to me why DiskMB is update.TaskGroup.EphemeralDisk.SizeMB instead of update.Alloc.AllocatedResources.Shared.DiskMB

[nickethier]

Ah I see, above Ports and Networks are set from the existing alloc because those cannot be updated inplace and is guarded by tasksUpdated.
The same is happening when setting the DiskMB here. So I think we can leave as is but would still add a .Copy() to the Networks.

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.