Rename SnapshotAfter to SnapshotMinIndex. The old name was not
technically accurate. SnapshotAtOrAfter is more accurate, but wordy and
still lacks context about what precisely it is at or after (the index).
SnapshotMinIndex was chosen as it describes the action (snapshot), a
constraint (minimum), and the object of the constraint (index).
Plan application should use a state snapshot at or after the Raft index
at which the plan was created otherwise it risks being rejected based on
stale data.
This commit adds a Plan.SnapshotIndex which is set by workers when
submitting plan. SnapshotIndex is set to the Raft index of the snapshot
the worker used to generate the plan.
Plan.SnapshotIndex plays a similar role to PlanResult.RefreshIndex.
While RefreshIndex informs workers their StateStore is behind the
leader's, SnapshotIndex is a way to prevent the leader from using a
StateStore behind the worker's.
Plan.SnapshotIndex should be considered the *lower bound* index for
consistently handling plan application.
Plans must also be committed serially, so Plan N+1 should use a state
snapshot containing Plan N. This is guaranteed for plans *after* the
first plan after a leader election.
The Raft barrier on leader election ensures the leader's statestore has
caught up to the log index at which it was elected. This guarantees its
StateStore is at an index > lastPlanIndex.
The old logic for cancelling duplicate blocked evaluations by job id had
the issue where the newer evaluation could have additional node classes
that it is (in)eligible for that we would not capture. This could make
it such that cluster state could change such that the job would make
progress but no evaluation was unblocked.
Denormalize jobs in AppendAllocs:
AppendAlloc was originally only ever called for inplace upgrades and new
allocations. Both these code paths would remove the job from the
allocation. Now we use this to also add fields such as FollowupEvalID
which did not normalize the job. This is only a performance enhancement.
Ignore terminal allocs:
Failed allocations are annotated with the followup Eval ID when one is
created to replace the failed allocation. However, in the plan applier,
when we check if allocations fit, these terminal allocations were not
filtered. This could result in the plan being rejected if the node would
be overcommited if the terminal allocations resources were considered.
This PR fixes a scheduling race condition in which the plan results from
one invocation of the scheduler were not being considered by the next
since the Worker was not waiting for the correct index.
Fixes https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/3198
Jasmine Dahilig