Fix a bug where the scheduler may panic when preemption is enabled. The conditions are a bit complicated:
A job with higher priority that schedule multiple allocations that preempt other multiple allocations on the same node, due to port/network/device assignments.
The cause of the bug is incidental mutation of internal cached data. `RankedNode` computes and cache proposed allocations in https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/blob/v1.1.6/scheduler/rank.go#L42-L53 . But scheduler then mutates the list to remove pre-emptable allocs in https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/blob/v1.1.6/scheduler/rank.go#L293-L294, and `RemoveAllocs` mutates and sets the tail of cached slice with `nil`s triggering a nil-pointer derefencing case.
I fixed the issue by avoiding the mutation in `RemoveAllocs` - the micro-optimization there doesn't seem necessary.
Fixes https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/11342
Cluster operators want to have better control over memory
oversubscription and may want to enable/disable it based on their
experience.
This PR adds a scheduler configuration field to control memory
oversubscription. It's additional field that can be set in the [API via Scheduler Config](https://www.nomadproject.io/api-docs/operator/scheduler), or [the agent server config](https://www.nomadproject.io/docs/configuration/server#configuring-scheduler-config).
I opted to have the memory oversubscription be an opt-in, but happy to change it. To enable it, operators should call the API with:
```json
{
"MemoryOversubscriptionEnabled": true
}
```
If memory oversubscription is disabled, submitting jobs specifying `memory_max` will get a "Memory oversubscription is not
enabled" warnings, but the jobs will be accepted without them accessing
the additional memory.
The warning message is like:
```
$ nomad job run /tmp/j
Job Warnings:
1 warning(s):
* Memory oversubscription is not enabled; Task cache.redis memory_max value will be ignored
==> Monitoring evaluation "7c444157"
Evaluation triggered by job "example"
==> Monitoring evaluation "7c444157"
Evaluation within deployment: "9d826f13"
Allocation "aa5c3cad" created: node "9272088e", group "cache"
Evaluation status changed: "pending" -> "complete"
==> Evaluation "7c444157" finished with status "complete"
# then you can examine the Alloc AllocatedResources to validate whether the task is allowed to exceed memory:
$ nomad alloc status -json aa5c3cad | jq '.AllocatedResources.Tasks["redis"].Memory'
{
"MemoryMB": 256,
"MemoryMaxMB": 0
}
```
* use msgtype in upsert node
adds message type to signature for upsert node, update tests, remove placeholder method
* UpsertAllocs msg type test setup
* use upsertallocs with msg type in signature
update test usage of delete node
delete placeholder msgtype method
* add msgtype to upsert evals signature, update test call sites with test setup msg type
handle snapshot upsert eval outside of FSM and ignore eval event
remove placeholder upsertevalsmsgtype
handle job plan rpc and prevent event creation for plan
msgtype cleanup upsertnodeevents
updatenodedrain msgtype
msg type 0 is a node registration event, so set the default to the ignore type
* fix named import
* fix signature ordering on upsertnode to match
Also includes unit tests for binpacker and preemption.
The tests verify that network resources specified at the
task group level are properly accounted for
IOPS have been modelled as a resource since Nomad 0.1 but has never
actually been detected and there is no plan in the short term to add
detection. This is because IOPS is a bit simplistic of a unit to define
the performance requirements from the underlying storage system. In its
current state it adds unnecessary confusion and can be removed without
impacting any users. This PR leaves IOPS defined at the jobspec parsing
level and in the api/ resources since these are the two public uses of
the field. These should be considered deprecated and only exist to allow
users to stop using them during the Nomad 0.9.x release. In the future,
there should be no expectation that the field will exist.
This commit implements an allocation selection algorithm for finding
allocations to preempt. It currently special cases network resource asks
from others (cpu/memory/disk/iops).
Seth Hoenig