The default job here contains some exec task config (for setting
command and args) that aren't used for mock driver. Now, the alloc
runner seems stricter about validating fields and errors on unexpected
fields.
Updating configs in tests so we can have an explicit task config
whenever driver is set explicitly.
Introduce a device manager that manages the lifecycle of device plugins
on the client. It fingerprints, collects stats, and forwards Reserve
requests to the correct plugin. The manager, also handles device plugins
failing and validates their output.
Fix an issue in which the deployment watcher would fail the deployment
based on the earliest progress deadline of the deployment regardless of
if the task group has finished.
Further fix an issue where the blocked eval optimization would make it
so no evals were created to progress the deployment. To reproduce this
issue, prior to this commit, you can create a job with two task groups.
The first group has count 1 and resources such that it can not be
placed. The second group has count 3, max_parallel=1, and can be placed.
Run this first and then update the second group to do a deployment. It
will place the first of three, but never progress since there exists a
blocked eval. However, that doesn't capture the fact that there are two
groups being deployed.
Although the really exciting change is making WaitForRunning return the
allocations that it started. This should cut down test boilerplate
significantly.
The interesting decision in this commit was to expose AR's state and not
a fully materialized Allocation struct. AR.clientAlloc builds an Alloc
that contains the task state, so I considered simply memoizing and
exposing that method.
However, that would lead to AR having two awkwardly similar methods:
- Alloc() - which returns the server-sent alloc
- ClientAlloc() - which returns the fully materialized client alloc
Since ClientAlloc() could be memoized it would be just as cheap to call
as Alloc(), so why not replace Alloc() entirely?
Replacing Alloc() entirely would require Update() to immediately
materialize the task states on server-sent Allocs as there may have been
local task state changes since the server received an Alloc update.
This quickly becomes difficult to reason about: should Update hooks use
the TaskStates? Are state changes caused by TR Update hooks immediately
reflected in the Alloc? Should AR persist its copy of the Alloc? If so,
are its TaskStates canonical or the TaskStates on TR?
So! Forget that. Let's separate the static Allocation from the dynamic
AR & TR state!
- AR.Alloc() is for static Allocation access (often for the Job)
- AR.AllocState() is for the dynamic AR & TR runtime state (deployment
status, task states, etc).
If code needs to know the status of a task: AllocState()
If code needs to know the names of tasks: Alloc()
It should be very easy for a developer to reason about which method they
should call and what they can do with the return values.
httptest.ResponseRecorder exposes a bytes.Buffer which we were reading
and writing concurrently to test streaming log APIs. This is a race, so
I wrapped the struct in a lock with some helpers.
Nick Ethier