You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Because there is only one parameter to set the CoreOS AMI (--ami) for all nodes and this value is used to create the bastion instance which is hard-coded to be t2.micro, this means that the AMI must be of HVM type. By extension this means that no PV-only instance types can be used (e.g. t1.micro, m1.small and m1.medium) as the argument to --instance-size.
If this is intended I suggest that it should be documented.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for bringint this up. It's not so much that it's intended than it is that almost all the code in kaws is based on how we deploy Kubernetes clusters at InQuicker. As an open source tool, we do want parts of it to be configurable, but not at huge expense to the complexity of the tool for our purposes. Could you say some more about your use case and why you want to use PV instances?
I have no actual use case that requires PV instances – I think the HVM limitation is fine if it simplifies the tool. I was just a bit surprised when I tried creating a cluster with m1.small and noticed that it failed because the t2.micro instance (that I didn't declare) required a HVM AMI. So maybe it should be documented as a requirement in the cluster reference?
Because there is only one parameter to set the CoreOS AMI (
--ami
) for all nodes and this value is used to create thebastion
instance which is hard-coded to bet2.micro
, this means that the AMI must be of HVM type. By extension this means that no PV-only instance types can be used (e.g.t1.micro
,m1.small
andm1.medium
) as the argument to--instance-size
.If this is intended I suggest that it should be documented.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: