Machine Based health Checks #3430
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
billyb2
force-pushed
the
machine_events
branch
3 times, most recently
from
b6886d7
to
b9e56b0
Compare
|
A huge caveat is that this doesn't support bluegreen deploys yet. It's quiet a bit more involved then i initially thought to get that support moving |
benbjohnson
approved these changes
Apr 29, 2024
dangra
reviewed
Apr 29, 2024
dangra
reviewed
Apr 29, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 1, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 1, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 1, 2024
billyb2
force-pushed
the
machine_events
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4bac995
to
a36f9f7
Compare
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
dangra
reviewed
May 6, 2024
We basically take the command provided in [[services.machine_checks]], and run it. If we get an exit code that isn't 0, we say that we failed the health check. This is only implemented for the rolling strategy right now, and needs to be implemented for bluegreen, canary, etc.
We're also now parallelizing canary machine creation. This isn't worth a fresh produce or anything since it was just a few lines of code, but still neat
The comment says it all, but we basically should only use the app config's kill signal/timeout if an image isn't set. Otherwise, we use the default info for the image.
Honestly does exactly what we need
|
^ rebased |
dangra
reviewed
May 13, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was expecting to see a test case added for this complex app case #3430 (comment)
It pretty much checks expectations around stop configuration, but in general it could be the perfect test case for all "machine check" related edge cases.
I'd add it as tomachine-machinechecks.toml, include multiple process groups, services and machine checks.
dangra
approved these changes
May 15, 2024
13 tasks
billyb2
added a commit
to superfly/docs
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
Please see superfly/flyctl#3430 for the corresponding flyctl PR
billyb2
added a commit
to superfly/docs
that referenced
this pull request
May 28, 2024
* Add a section about machine_checks Please see superfly/flyctl#3430 for the corresponding flyctl PR * Switch machine to Machine Vale have mercy * Add machine_checks to http_services
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
We basically take the command provided in [[services.machine_checks]],
and run it. If we get an exit code that isn't 0, we say that we failed
the health check. This is only implemented for the rolling strategy
right now, and needs to be implemented for bluegreen, canary, etc.
Fixes #3233
Change Summary
What and Why:
How:
Related to:
Documentation