[ECS]: ECS Stateful Services
This issue, related to stateful services, complements issue #64 regarding ECS/EBS native integration. The proposal is to introduce a new type of ECS Services in which each task is allocated a unique identifier that persists even if the task dies and is replaced. **Background** ECS users have expressed the need to deploy stateful workloads on ECS. For example, in #64 , customers would like to have native integration between ECS and EBS so that ECS Tasks are automatically and dynamically attached to an EBS volume. Stateless containerized applications have traditionally been deployed as services with 'fungible' tasks, meaning that the different instantiations of a single application are interchangeable. To deploy these workloads, ECS Services allow customers to run and maintain a specified number of instantiations of the same Task simultaneously. Certain workloads however require each Task within a service to play a specific role. This is particularly true for some stateful workloads, in which specific Tasks play a special role such as ‘primary’ or ‘leader’. **Potential Feature Proposal** I am opening this issue to gather use-cases and +1s on a potential feature that would introduce ECS Services for stateful workloads, in which each Task gets assigned an identifier. In this potential scenario, if the Task dies and a new replacing Task is started by ECS , the same identifier, volume, and Service Discovery / CloudMap name will be allocated to the new task. As we research
Posted by Akramio on Jan 21, 2019, 9:08 PM
Tags
Related issues
- struct's lifetime requirements can be bypassed via covariant field assignment
- Proposal to Reorganize the Moderation Team and Review Moderation Policies
- Progressive FPS degradation appears to be related to dota2.com — blocking the domain prevents the performance loss
- proposal: container/...: generic collection types
- Better Custom Endpoint BYOK
- A concrete policy for backward compatibility until Godot 5.0
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.4,000 issues0 comments
github (Other)
struct's lifetime requirements can be bypassed via covariant field assignment
Proposal to Reorganize the Moderation Team and Review Moderation Policies
Progressive FPS degradation appears to be related to dota2.com — blocking the domain prevents the performance loss
proposal: container/...: generic collection types
Better Custom Endpoint BYOK
A concrete policy for backward compatibility until Godot 5.0
New MTP models not supported
Tracking: 429 / Capacity Issues
[ECS]: ECS Stateful Services
This issue, related to stateful services, complements issue #64 regarding ECS/EBS native integration. The proposal is to introduce a new type of ECS Services in which each task is allocated a unique identifier that persists even if the task dies and is replaced. **Background** ECS users have expressed the need to deploy stateful workloads on ECS. For example, in #64 , customers would like to have native integration between ECS and EBS so that ECS Tasks are automatically and dynamically attached to an EBS volume. Stateless containerized applications have traditionally been deployed as services with 'fungible' tasks, meaning that the different instantiations of a single application are interchangeable. To deploy these workloads, ECS Services allow customers to run and maintain a specified number of instantiations of the same Task simultaneously. Certain workloads however require each Task within a service to play a specific role. This is particularly true for some stateful workloads, in which specific Tasks play a special role such as ‘primary’ or ‘leader’. **Potential Feature Proposal** I am opening this issue to gather use-cases and +1s on a potential feature that would introduce ECS Services for stateful workloads, in which each Task gets assigned an identifier. In this potential scenario, if the Task dies and a new replacing Task is started by ECS , the same identifier, volume, and Service Discovery / CloudMap name will be allocated to the new task. As we research
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.