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

add -data-dir option when starting nomad #2345

Closed
wants to merge 18 commits into from
Closed

add -data-dir option when starting nomad #2345

wants to merge 18 commits into from

Conversation

scottw
Copy link

@scottw scottw commented Feb 22, 2017

When you run the commands from the guide as it exists now returns:

# nomad agent -config=/etc/nomad.d/server.hcl
==> Must specify data directory

By adding -data-dir nomad starts properly.

@dadgar
Copy link
Contributor

dadgar commented Feb 23, 2017

Could you instead add it to the config?

schmichael and others added 16 commits February 22, 2017 20:32
A change in the behavior of `os.Rename` in Go 1.8 brought to light a
difference in the logic between `{Alloc,Task}Runner` and this test:

AllocRunner builds the alloc dir, moves dirs if necessary, and then lets
TaskRunner call TaskDir.Build().

This test called `TaskDir.Build` *before* `AllocDir.Move`, so in Go 1.8
it failed to `os.Rename over` the empty {data,local} dirs.

I updated the test to behave like the real code, but I defensively added
`os.Remove` calls as a subtle change in call order shouldn't break this
code. `os.Remove` won't remove a non-empty directory, so it's still
safe.
This commit makes an explicit note in the documentation for the Nomad
task specification about capping of `max_kill_timeout` based on agent
configuration as well as task configuration.
This PR removes defaulting from the parse, fixes some regressions that
existed as part of the parser refactor and fixes the tests.
This PR adds the drivers that are enabled to the output of `nomad
node-status`
@scottw
Copy link
Author

scottw commented Feb 23, 2017

Updated.

@scottw
Copy link
Author

scottw commented Feb 23, 2017

Hold off... I should have checked this first.

@scottw
Copy link
Author

scottw commented Feb 23, 2017

Ok, should be good now.

@dadgar
Copy link
Contributor

dadgar commented Feb 24, 2017

@scottw Unfortunately I think something happened when you rebased as you pulled in a lot of other changes.

@scottw
Copy link
Author

scottw commented Feb 25, 2017

Those should have been from master. Sorry for the mess. I'm going to close this request and make a clean fork.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 5, 2023

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 5, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants