Skip to content
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

Allow for multiple machine-type clusters #19

Open
ihodes opened this issue Aug 19, 2016 · 2 comments
Open

Allow for multiple machine-type clusters #19

ihodes opened this issue Aug 19, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@ihodes
Copy link
Member

ihodes commented Aug 19, 2016

Would be nice if every job didn't have to run on a e.g. 50gb pod when most jobs probably require way less.

e.g. a job that makes an HTTP API call should run on a 1gb node, not a 50gb node

If it were possible to schedule multiple jobs at the same time on the same pod (am I using this word correctly?) then this would be less of a problem, but still not ideal.

@smondet
Copy link
Member

smondet commented Aug 19, 2016

Cf. also #1.

@cioc
Copy link
Collaborator

cioc commented Aug 19, 2016

A pod is a collection of containers that run together i.e. they are scheduled on the same machine, share a port namespace + can communicate via localhost, and share a memory namespace allowing for other IPC mechanisms. Each one of the jobs submitted by ketrew becomes a pod (that's my understanding at least).

It is possible to schedule multiple pods on the same machine at once. To do this, the cumulative resource requests of the pods must be less than the machine's available resources i.e. total requested CPUs + RAM must be less than physical CPUs + RAM.

Going forward, we should size our pods based on what they actually need rather than always asking for an entire box. This was a good way to get started quickly and saved us the time of thinking through every jobs resource requirements.

smondet added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 15, 2017
This fixes issue #19, while still being able to avoid `bash` if needed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants