-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 468
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Docs for decommissioning and removing nodes #1876
Conversation
@tschottdorf, @bdarnell, I still have a bit of work to do, but I'd like your early feedback on how I've documented decommissioning and removing nodes. Please take a look at the changes to [ HTML versions: |
Looks good! I don't fully understand where the docs sit in the greater scheme of things, but it seems that there's a bit of duplication that's likely to rot? Other than that, only two points:
Reviewed 21 of 21 files at r1. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 8 at r1 (raw file):
This isn't necessary, can do this from one of the machines itself. v1.1/stop-a-node.md, line 9 at r1 (raw file):
or reacting to hardware failures. Comments from Reviewable |
Oh, and perhaps a |
Reviewed 21 of 21 files at r1. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 10 at r1 (raw file):
If the node is up, it's often easier to ask it for its ID than to scan the v1.1/decommission-a-node.md, line 13 at r1 (raw file):
This should also discuss what it means to decommission a node that's already down (i.e. that this is what you'd do to remove permanently dead nodes from the UI). v1.1/recommission-a-node.md, line 3 at r1 (raw file):
Recommissioning is not about temporarily stopping a node, it's only for undoing a (mistaken) decommission. I'd include it on the decommission page instead of giving it its own page. v1.1/remove-a-node.md, line 2 at r1 (raw file):
"Removing" a node implies permanent (decomissioning) removal to me, whereas "stop" is very strongly associated with a temporary stop. I'd swap this doc with the stop-a-node one, so "stop" describes the temporary v1.1/remove-a-node.md, line 7 at r1 (raw file):
Sending a signal to the process is also a valid option (for both foreground and background processes). This is the mechanisms that most process managers would use. v1.1/remove-a-node.md, line 9 at r1 (raw file):
Not just the Comments from Reviewable |
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 8 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 10 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
... or it's printed in the admin ui, if what you know is the host it's running on. Note that the node may be dead, in which case they shouldn't try to talk to the node. Comments from Reviewable |
TFTR, @tschottdorf and @bdarnell. Will rework soon. |
_includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 8 at r1 (raw file): Previously, tschottdorf (Tobias Schottdorf) wrote…
Hmm, you can ssh onto the node, it's true, but I think I've been told by @mberhault or @bdarnell that it's best to recommend running client commands from elsewhere? Comments from Reviewable |
v1.1/decommission-a-node.md, line 13 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
In that case, do you just run the Comments from Reviewable |
v1.1/recommission-a-node.md, line 3 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
Sorry. This is just a stub page with incorrect copy. I'll remove it and add this content to the decommission page, as you suggest. Comments from Reviewable |
v1.1/remove-a-node.md, line 2 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
Again, sorry. This is just a stub I left in place accidentally. I think I'll try to have one page, Stop or Remove a Node, cover both cases. Comments from Reviewable |
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 8 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed. v1.1/decommission-a-node.md, line 13 at r1 (raw file): Previously, jseldess wrote…
Yes. (Just don't use Comments from Reviewable |
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 8 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 8 at r1 (raw file): Previously, jseldess wrote…
Serious deployments would likely have a controller host, but generally I don't think it's necessary. @mberhault and @bdarnell are definitely the authority on what we want to recommend though. Comments from Reviewable |
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 8 unresolved discussions, some commit checks failed. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 8 at r1 (raw file): Previously, tschottdorf (Tobias Schottdorf) wrote…
In general, I think it's fine for our instructions to demonstrate running the command on a node; we don't need to be didactic about this every time. However, because Comments from Reviewable |
b2a273f
to
66fd90c
Compare
@tschottdorf and @bdarnell, please take another look.
|
Review status: 12 of 28 files reviewed at latest revision, 8 unresolved discussions, some commit checks pending. v1.1/stop-a-node.md, line 9 at r1 (raw file): Previously, tschottdorf (Tobias Schottdorf) wrote…
Done. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 8 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
Done. _includes/cli/decommission-a-node.html, line 10 at r1 (raw file): Previously, tschottdorf (Tobias Schottdorf) wrote…
Using both of these methods now, in different places. v1.1/decommission-a-node.md, line 13 at r1 (raw file): Previously, bdarnell (Ben Darnell) wrote…
Done. Comments from Reviewable |
Reviewed 14 of 21 files at r2, 2 of 2 files at r3. Comments from Reviewable |
Decided to add descriptions for fields in |
5ccb38e
to
f7bce20
Compare
cockroach node
docs.Fixes #1496
Fixes #97