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

acs: expose scale command #1135

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 25, 2016
Merged

acs: expose scale command #1135

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 25, 2016

Conversation

yugangw-msft
Copy link
Contributor

@yugangw-msft yugangw-msft commented Oct 24, 2016

Notes:

  1. Expose scale command which updates the private agent count, a common scenario.
    2 Hide the update, as there are nothing else people can tweak. The tagging coming with the generic update can be accomplished by az resource tag.

@yugangw-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

yugangw-msft commented Oct 24, 2016

//cc @sauryadas @derekbekoe @tjprescott

Copy link
Member

@derekbekoe derekbekoe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@tjprescott
Copy link
Member

I don't understand the reason for this change. If the previous version let you update the agent-count and update the tags, why would we remove the tagging ability and direct people to use the more obscure az resource tag just we can rename the command from update to scale (which then necessitates the awkward name of new-agent-count that was already implied in the update command)?

To me it would make more sense to keep update, rename 'agent-count' to 'instances' (which I think is clearer) and expose --tag.

@sauryadas
Copy link

@tjprescott the scale command is more intuitive. With update, it can mean updating VM Sizes, no of masters, location , etc. which we want to avoid. You can both scale in and out with this command which is why we call it out with new-agent-count to point out that this is your new cluster size. Open to other suggestions.

@yugangw-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tjprescott, per discussion, opened #1149 to track the work of getting the generic update command back when conditions are met. So far, we agree with @sauryadas, that we only need scale

@yugangw-msft yugangw-msft merged commit 98572ba into Azure:master Oct 25, 2016
@yugangw-msft yugangw-msft deleted the acsscale branch October 25, 2016 21:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants