Re: Pod persistence without replication controller

[Joel Pearson]

You could use a StatefulSet if you want a consistent hostname, it would
also ensure that there is a always one running.
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 at 3:49 am, Feld, Michael (IMS) 
wrote:

> Does anyone know why a standalone pod (without a replication controller)
> sometimes persists through a host/node reboot, but not all times (not
> evacuating first)? We have a database pod that we cannot risk scaling, and
> want to ensure that it’s always running.
>
> --
>
> Information in this e-mail may be confidential. It is intended only for
> the addressee(s) identified above. If you are not the addressee(s), or an
> employee or agent of the addressee(s), please note that any dissemination,
> distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender of the
> error.
> ___
> users mailing list
> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com
> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
>
___
users mailing list
users@lists.openshift.redhat.com
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users

Pod persistence without replication controller

[Feld, Michael (IMS)]

Does anyone know why a standalone pod (without a replication controller) 
sometimes persists through a host/node reboot, but not all times (not 
evacuating first)? We have a database pod that we cannot risk scaling, and want 
to ensure that it's always running.



Information in this e-mail may be confidential. It is intended only for the 
addressee(s) identified above. If you are not the addressee(s), or an employee 
or agent of the addressee(s), please note that any dissemination, distribution, 
or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender of the error.
___
users mailing list
users@lists.openshift.redhat.com
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users