Skip to content

NodePool and MachinePool name character limit #143

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

Closed
Tracked by #174
VanillaSpoon opened this issue Sep 18, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #182
Closed
Tracked by #174

NodePool and MachinePool name character limit #143

VanillaSpoon opened this issue Sep 18, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #182
Assignees

Comments

@VanillaSpoon
Copy link
Contributor

VanillaSpoon commented Sep 18, 2023

Describe the Bug

Machine pool names on openshift must be under 30 characters long, whilst for NodePools on HyperShift the character limit is 15. Failing to produce a name under the character limit will prevent scaling up.

The name is generated as so within instascale:
machinePoolID := strings.ReplaceAll(aw.Name+"-"+userRequestedInstanceType, ".", "-")

This does not provide a user with feedback as to whether the name is under 30 characters when trying to scale up, and therefore may be overseen, as they can still create the appwrapper without failing.

For example, creating an appwrapper with the name: machinepool-scaleup-example
will succeed, however the machinepoolID may be set to machinepool-scaleup-example-g4dn-xlarge which will not scale as it is over the character count.

Suggestions could be to:

  • alter the ID creation method within instascale to remove this possibility
  • return an error within the sdk, as to ensure the user gets notified during the appwrapper creation.
@VanillaSpoon VanillaSpoon changed the title MachinePool name must be under 30 characters NodePool and MachinePool name character limit Nov 8, 2023
@VanillaSpoon VanillaSpoon self-assigned this Nov 9, 2023
@VanillaSpoon VanillaSpoon mentioned this issue Nov 10, 2023
8 tasks
@VanillaSpoon VanillaSpoon moved this from In Progress to Ready For Review in Project CodeFlare Sprint Board Nov 20, 2023
@Fiona-Waters Fiona-Waters moved this from Ready For Review to In Review in Project CodeFlare Sprint Board Nov 21, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Review to Done in Project CodeFlare Sprint Board Jan 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants