New ebs volume #277
Merged
New ebs volume #277
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
catching up feature branch to main branch
merging main into feature branch
merging main into feature branch1
catching up feature branch with main
merging main into feature branch
merging main
merging main into feature branch
catching up feature branch with main branch
catching up with main
Kamsiy
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2024
catching up branch with main
Kamsiy
approved these changes
Nov 7, 2024
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2024
* creating new directory, creating new EBS volume, creating mounting point * changing dir in engine util * adjusting new volume size * changing conflicting ebs names * fixing block device path shell script * trying different path name * trying different directory name * chaning file path name * changing dir name back * adding error handling to engine shell script * formatting tf file * adding some logging and cleaning shell script * add volume path * running ruf * adding logging to available space * adding logging to engine.py * change log type * adding another log case * changing path for checking disk space * more debugging * adding more logging * fixing clean up dir * updating cloned_repo volume size * removing comment
alligning main with feature branch
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
Previously we had to do this when calculating if the repo can fit in the EBS:
# The worst repo encountered (so far) is twice the size on diskWe had to do this because we wanted to leave enough space incase certain plugins are ran that take up more storage
Now we do not need to do this as the cloned repos and the docker instance are on 2 different EBS volumes, no longer interfering with each other
* Container orchestration changes removed from this PR due to some issues*Motivation and Context
Our EBS volumes were getting full since we had both the cloned repos and the docker daemon running in the same volume. This causes issues because we are not able to predict how much memory/storage our docker containers are going to take up as it is dependent on what plugins are running and it is very variable. Creating a seperate EBS volume for just cloned repos helps us provide more storage for our docker instance to run the plugins in isolation, and our cloned repos to have their own dedicated storage.
How Has This Been Tested?
in a dev environment
Types of changes
Checklist