Instance: Fix placement when moving within same cluster group #12148
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
When moving an instance to the same cluster target group it already belongs to, another node needs to be picked in case it currently hosts the instance and got selected due to least amount of instances. Signed-off-by: Julian Pelizäus <[email protected]>
simondeziel
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2023
tomponline
reviewed
Aug 11, 2023
Signed-off-by: Julian Pelizäus <[email protected]>
roosterfish
force-pushed
the
fix_mv_instance_placement
branch
from
67133be to
58e3e9b
Compare
tomponline
approved these changes
Aug 17, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
First observed in #12143.
When moving instances within the same cluster group, the node which is currently hosting the instance should not be selected by the scheduler due to having the least amount of instances.
GetNodeWithLeastInstances()most probably returned the instances in a different order than usual. This led the scheduler to pick the node that is already hosting the instance as candidate.