Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 782552

Summary: Use idempotent EC2 RunInstances
Product: Red Hat Enterprise MRG Reporter: Timothy St. Clair <tstclair>
Component: condorAssignee: Timothy St. Clair <tstclair>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Luigi Toscano <ltoscano>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 2.1CC: ltoscano, matt, mkudlej, rrati, tstclair
Target Milestone: 2.3   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: condor-7.8.2-0.1 Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
C: Desire to add support for idempotent EC2 RunInstances. C: Performing an idempotent operation more than once yields the same result as applying it just once. C: Added support inside of the ec2 protocol to add idempotent support when calling RunInstances. R: The ec2_gahp now supports idempotent RunInstances.
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 876873 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-03-06 18:40:51 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 750078, 876873    

Comment 1 Luigi Toscano 2012-03-07 18:34:45 UTC
Just to recap: from a user point of view, does this bug bring only a change in a way keypairs are handled? (no more or not only self-generated keypairs, but specify an existing one from the keypairs stored amazon servers)
According to the original report, I see that the old behavior will stay too; will we support both?

Comment 2 Timothy St. Clair 2012-03-07 21:18:02 UTC
We support both methods, but idepotent instances is tangential to comment #1.

Comment 4 Timothy St. Clair 2012-03-19 18:46:32 UTC
    Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field
    accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
    
    New Contents:
C: Desire to add support for idempotent EC2 RunInstances.
C: Performing an idempotent operation more than once yields the same result as applying it just once.
C: Added support inside of the ec2 protocol to add idempotent support when calling RunInstances.
R: The ec2_gahp now supports idempotent RunInstances.

Comment 5 Luigi Toscano 2012-04-03 11:54:27 UTC
After going through the bug again, I think I'm missing something: according to the condor ticket, the keypair is used as client token so that the requests to the same running AMI can be idempotent. What happen when the same key is used for different jobs/AMI instances?

Comment 6 Timothy St. Clair 2012-04-03 13:15:57 UTC
This has nothing to do with keys.  The client token is a unique identifier which is generated in the gridmanager.  

--------------------------------------------------------------
ClientToken
Unique, case-sensitive identifier you provide to ensure idempotency of the request. For more information, go to How to Ensure Idempotency in the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud User Guide.

Type: String

Default: None

Constraints: Maximum 64 ASCII characters

see also: 
http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/Run_Instance_Idempotency.html
--------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 7 Luigi Toscano 2012-04-03 17:03:12 UTC
Information about the new possible way of handling keypairs, which are reported in the upstream condor ticket referenced by this bug, has been moved to a separated bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809551

Comment 11 Luigi Toscano 2013-02-11 00:39:23 UTC
Running/control/shutdown of EC2 instances is executed as before.

Verified on RHEL5.9/6.4 beta, either condor-7.8.8-0.1 or condor-7.8.8-0.4.1.

Comment 13 errata-xmlrpc 2013-03-06 18:40:51 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0564.html