Created a ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1900 and assigned to myself.
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:29 AM, David McLaughlin <dmclaugh...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 for thinner client. > > Another reason rolling update was moved to the Scheduler was to have an > audit trail of changes to the job. If we could also get these restarts > appearing on the job page, it would be great. > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > If I recall correctly, the rolling update mechanism was added to Aurora > > because having the client coordinate batching was pretty tricky. I think > > the same applies here to a rolling restart. > > > > Considering the job controller technically supports this, adding a new > RPC > > to expose this behaviour would be beneficial. > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Cody G <codyhg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'd like to implement some new functionality in Aurora allowing for > > rolling > > > job restarts. There are many reasons why we might need to restart a > job, > > > e.g. freeing instances of a job from deadlock or refreshing some sort > of > > > external configuration. > > > > > > Currently, there are two options to execute a rolling restart, however > > both > > > are undesirable — either use the restartShards endpoint and implement > > > batching client-side, or use startJobUpdate with slightly modified task > > > config so that a non-empty job diff forces an update. I propose adding > a > > > new thrift RPC for launching a rolling restart, which is an interface > > > around the existing upgrade logic. Instead of requiring a TaskConfig > and > > > instanceCount, this restart endpoint will only accept JobUpdateSettings > > and > > > will simply launch an update with the currently used task > configuration. > > > All of the existing job update RPCs will still be able to access > updates > > > which were launched from this restart endpoint. This ensures restarts > are > > > available in the UI and no additional storage changes are required. > > > > > > If this proposal seems reasonable, I’ll file a ticket and draft up a > more > > > detailed RFC for further review. > > > > > > Cody > > > > > > -- > > > Zameer Manji > > > > > >
