Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
[Failover] Fix leakage of existing cluster when failed to start #1497
[Failover] Fix leakage of existing cluster when failed to start #1497
Changes from 6 commits
5b91374
655267b
b817ab2
736b49d
9291225
c8b4669
e63622c
909b7da
528735a
28b7b2c
d06eea5
cbf2684
3832ca2
63cd795
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Q: is it possible that a cluster can partially exist and be in INIT? E.g., launched 2 nodes, manually terminate 1, then after a refresh it's in INIT?
How does this differ from the
cluster_exists
arg?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this follows the logic in the previous code that any cluster in INIT status will be able to fail over to other regions.
However, after thinking more about this, here is the pros and cons for the behavior of adding INIT in the list as well:
Environment
A cluster exists and is in INIT mode.
sky start -c cluster
Current behavior:
ray up
fails, we terminate the clustercluster
(same region/zone/accelerators)New behavior
Adding INIT to the list (or use the cluster_exists directly)
ray up
fails, we try to stop the clustersky launch -c cluster
Current behavior:
ray up
fails, we terminate the clusterNew behavior
Adding INIT to the list
ray up
fails, we try to stop the clustersky launch -c cluster task.yaml
Current behavior
ray up
fails, we terminate the clusterNew behavior
Adding INIT to the list
ray up
fails, we try to stop the clusterPro for adding INIT: more consistent for the three commands
Con for adding INIT: any INIT cluster in the status table needs to explicitly
sky down
before the failover can work.For example, if a user Ctrl+C the
sky launch
during failover, she will have to dosky down
first beforesky launch
being able to failover to other regions/clouds.Based on the discussion above, I would prefer to add INIT to the list as well, to make the failover more conservative avoiding accident termination of the user's cluster.
Wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed with going with the new behavior, with some asterisks to discuss in the future.
For example, it's a bit unintuitive to me that a
start/launch
may transitionINIT
toSTOPPED
. I see why that may be desired, but it may make the state transitions more complex. TBD.