During a pipeline run, under deployment job, providing a deployment environment eliminates the need of providing service connection manually. I'd guess, it's either creating a new SC at this time or it would have created SC at the time of environment creation and using the same.
Either ways, is there a way to find out which Service connection is being used from the logs of pipeline run or from anywhere else?
In our environment, I see a lot of service connection for one environment and a cleanup is necessary to get things in place.
I tried giving SC manually along with environment and it works as expected. So, going forward, I can use this method. But for cleanup, I'd still like to know which one gets used when not specified! (none of the auto-created SCs show any execution history, but I know the deployment has happened multiple times)
As a Kubernetes resource in an environment is referencing Kubernetes service connection, you can use this API to list the serviceEndpointId of a Kubernetes resource, which is also the resourceId of the referenced service connection.
GET https://dev.azure.com/{organization}/{project}/_apis/distributedtask/environments/{environmentId}/providers/kubernetes/{resourceId}?api-version=7.0
Applied with the value of the serviceEndpointId from the response of the above API, we can proceed to use this API to get the referenced service connection details.
GET https://dev.azure.com/{organization}/{project}/_apis/serviceendpoint/endpoints/{endpointId}?api-version=7.0
Where I work has just started migrating to the cloud. We've successfully deployed a number of resources using Terraform and Pipelines into Azure.
Where we are running into issues is deploying a Container App Environment, we have code that was working in a less locked down environment (setup for Proof of Concept), but are now having issues using that code in our go-forward.
When deploying, the Container App Environment spends 30mins attempting to create before it returns a context deadline exceeded error. Looking in Azure Portal, I can see the resource in "Waiting" provisioning state and I can also see the MC_ and AKS resources that get generated. It then fails around 4hrs later.
Any advice?
I am suspecting it's related to security on the Virtual Network that the subnets are sitting on, but I'm not seeing any logs on the deployment to confirm. The original subnets had a Network Security Group (NSG) assigned and I configured the rules that Microsoft provide before I added a couple of subnets without an NSG assigned and no luck.
My next step is to try provisioning it via the GUI and see if that works.
I managed to break our build in the "anything goes" environment.
The root cause is an incomplete configuration of the Virtual Network which has custom DNS entries. This has now been passed to our network architects to resolve. If I can get more details on the fix they apply I'll include that here for anyone else that runs into the issue.
We have been using Terraform for almost a year now to manage all kinds of resources on AWS from bastion hosts to VPCs, RDS and also EKS.
We are sometimes really baffled by the EKS module. It could however be due to lack of understanding (and documentation), so here it goes:
Problem: Upsizing Disk (volume)
module "eks" {
source = "terraform-aws-modules/eks/aws"
version = "12.2.0"
cluster_name = local.cluster_name
cluster_version = "1.19"
subnets = module.vpc.private_subnets
#...
node_groups = {
first = {
desired_capacity = 1
max_capacity = 5
min_capacity = 1
instance_type = "m5.large"
}
}
I thought the default value for this (dev) k8s cluster's node can easily be the default 20GBs but it's filling up fast so I know want to change disk_size to let's say 40GBs.
=> I thought I could just add something like disk_size=40 and done.
terraform plan tells me I need to replace the node. This is a 1 node cluster, so not good. And even if it were I don't want to e.g. drain nodes. That's why I thought we are using managed k8s like EKS.
Expected behaviour: since these are elastic volumes I should be able to upsize but not downsize, why is that not possible? I can def. do so from the AWS UI.
Sure with a slightly scary warning:
Are you sure that you want to modify volume vol-xx?
It may take some time for performance changes to take full effect.
You may need to extend the OS file system on the volume to use any newly-allocated space
But I can work with the provided docs on that: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/recognize-expanded-volume-linux.html?icmpid=docs_ec2_console
Any guidelines on how to up the storage? If I do so with the UI but don't touch Terraform then my EKS state will be nuked/out of sync.
To my knowledge, there is currently no way to resize an EKS node volume without recreating the node using Terraform.
Fortunately, there is a workaround: As you also found out, you can directly change the node size via the AWS UI or API. To update your state file afterward, you can run terraform apply -refresh-only to download the latest data (e.g., the increased node volume size). After that, you can change the node size in your Terraform plan to keep both plan and state in sync.
For the future, you might want to look into moving to ephemeral nodes as (at least my) experience shows that you will have unforeseeable changes to clusters and nodes from time to time. Already planning with replaceable nodes in mind will make these changes substantially easier.
By using the terraform-aws-eks terraform module you are actually following the "ephemeral nodes" paradigm, because for both ways of creating instances (self-managed workers or managed node groups) the module is creating Autoscaling Groups that create EC2 instances out of a Launch Template.
ASG and Launch Templates are specifically designed so that you don't care anymore about specific nodes, and rather you just care about the number of nodes. This means that for updating the nodes, you just replace them with new ones, which will use the new updated launch template (with more GBs for example, or with a new updated AMI, or a new instance type).
This is called "rolling updates", and it can be done manually (adding new instances, then draining the node, then deleting the old node), with scripts (see: eks-rolling-update in github by Hellofresh), or it can be done automagically if you use the AWS managed nodes (the ones you are actually using when specifying "node_groups", that is why if you add more GB, it will replace the node automatically when you run apply).
And this paradigm is the most common when operating Kubernetes in the cloud (and also very common on-premise datacenters when using virtualization).
Option 1) Self Managed Workers
With self managed nodes, when you change a parameter like disk_size or instance_type, it will change the Launch Template. It will update the $latest version tag, which is commonly where the ASG is pointing to (although can be changed). This means that old instances will not see any change, but new ones will have the updated configuration.
If you want to change the existing instances, you actually want to replace them with new ones. That is what this ephemeral nodes paradigm is.
One by one you can drain the old instances while increasing the number of desired_instances on the ASG, or let the cluster autoscaler do the job. Alternatively, you can use an automated script which does this for you for each ASG: https://github.com/hellofresh/eks-rolling-update
In terraform_aws_eks module, you create self managed workers by either using worker_groups or worker_groups_launch_template (recommended) field
Option 2) Managed Nodes
Managed nodes is an EKS-specific feature. You configure them very similarly, but in reality, it is an abstraction, and AWS will create the actual underlying ASG.
You can specify a Launch Template to be used by the ASG and its version. Some config can be specified at the managed node level (i.e. AMI and instance_types) and at the Launch Template (if it wasn't specified in the former).
Any change on the node group level config, or on the Launch Template version, will trigger an automatic rolling update, which will replace all old instances.
You can delay the rolling update by just not pointing to the $latest version (or pointing to $default, and not updating the $default tag when changing the LT).
In terraform_aws_eks module, you create self managed workers by using the node_groups field. You can also play with these settings: create_launch_template=true and set_instance_types_on_lt=true if you want the module to create the LT for you (alternatively you can just not use it, or pass a reference to one); and to set the instance_type on such LT as specified above.
But behavior is similar to worker groups. In no case you will have your existing instances changed. You can only change them manually.
However, there is an alternative: The manual way
You can use the EKS module to create the control plane, but then use a regular EC2 resource in terraform (https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/aws/latest/docs/resources/instance) to create one ore multiple (using count or for_each) instances.
If you create the instances using the aws_instance resource, then terraform will patch those instances (updated-in-place) when any change is allowed (i.e. increasing the root volue GB or the instance type; whereas changing the AMI will force a replacement).
The only tricky part, is that you need to configure the cloud-init script to make the instance join the cluster (something that is automatically done by the EKS module when using self/managed node groups).
However, it is very possible, and you can borrow the script from the module and plug it into the aws_instance's user_data field (https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/aws/latest/docs/resources/instance#user_data)
In this case (when talking about disk_size), however, you still need to manually (either by SSH, or by running an hacky exec using terraform) to patch the XFS filesystem so it sees the increased disk space.
Another alternative: Consider Kubernetes storage
That said, there is also another alternative for certain use cases. If you want to increase the disk space of those instances because of one of your applications using a hostPath, then it might be the case that you can use a kubernetes built-in storage solution using the EBS CSI driver.
For example, I manage an ElasticSearch cluster in Kubernetes (and deploy it from terraform with the helm module), and it uses dynamic storage provisioning to request an EBS volume (note that performance is the same, because both root and this other volume are EBS volumes). EBS CSI driver supports volume expansion, so I can just increase this disk by changing a terraform variable.
To conclude, I would not recommend the aws_instance way, unless you understand it and are sure you really want it. It may make sense in certain cases, but definitely not common
In our application if we start a cron job manually from the BO, it ignores the already set nodeGroup and instead it starts on the current server node. (If it is triggered by a time based trigger it starts correctly on the set nodeGroup.)
Is it on purpose or is it a bug? Are we missing something?
Hybris version is 5.7.
I would expect it to work like that since you have chosen the node by opening its backoffice. You could also choose the node you want to run the cronjob on by accessing its backoffice. Which node you access depends on the URL you enter.
Everytime I make a new deployment of my app, my nodes start reporting nodeHasDiskPressure . After around 10 minutes or so the node goes back to a normal state. I found this SO answer regarding setting thresholds: DiskPressure crashing the node
.. but I am not sure how to actually set these thresholds on Google Kubernetes Engine
The kubelet option you mentioned can be added to you cluster "instance-template"
Make a copy of the instance-template that has been used for your cluster (instance-group) after clicked on copy before to save you can make some changes at the instance template,you can add those flags into : Instance-template --> Custom metadata--> kube-env
The flag will be added in this way;
KUBELET_TEST_ARGS: --image-gc-high-threshold=[your value] KUBELET_TEST_ARGS: --low-diskspace-threshold-mb=[your value] KUBELET_TEST_ARGS: --image-gc-low-threshold=[your value]
Once you set your values,save the instance template then edit the instance group of your cluster by changing the instance-template from the default to your custom one, once done it hit "rolling restart/replace" on your Dashboard on the instance group main page. This will restart your instances of your cluster with the new values.