Auto Scale numerically correct removes hosts when needed

Avatar
Johnny Lambert

Good morning!

I'm not sure if this is a thing that is possible, but hoping it could be.

With the release of Easv6 in the regions we are active, we will be able to reduce the number of hosts per host pool. With that, this morning when I went to scale down the needed hosts, instead of removing the last numerical host, it picked a random one, which in this case was not the last one.

Ex:
Current: AVD01, AVD02 ,AVD03
We want:, AVD01, AVD02

Go to Auto scale config and change base host pool capacity from 3 > 2
it begins removing AVD02 instead of AVD03
(For context, AVD02 & AVD03 were powered off at the time of saving the Auto Scale config.)

WHAT I WOULD LIKE:
If Auto scale can take the number into consideration.

WHAT I THINK HAPPENED:
Even though AVD02 was numerically name that, I think it was technically the last one that finished, so Auto scale based it off that.

Thanks for reading!

0

Comments (4 comments)

Sort by
0
Avatar
Dave Stephenson

I like the idea, but it may be a bit difficult to implement.

Not everyone follows the same naming scheme for their AVD Hosts.
Many, will have a random number of characters at the end (i.e. AVDHost-001, SH-092d, AZHost-e53s, etc.) so the "right" host may not be removed.

Right now, I believe the logic is that it goes through the list (alpha-numeric) of all offline hosts and takes the first one in the list to be removed. In your case, AVD02 was the first powered-off VM in the list so it was removed.

I'm guessing we could change the logic to go from the bottom of the alpha-numeric list and that would do what you're wanting.
But the "devil's advocate" side of me asks, "Is it worth the effort?"
Even if we change the behavior, there could be a scenario where AVD03 was the powered-on host and then AVD01 would be the host that was deleted, and you'd be right back where you started where the Host Naming Scheme is off.

 

Something that may work better would be to add an option to the Remove Host task that allows you to update the Host Pool settings.
If we add an option that presents you with a mini-AutoScale configuration wizard that just includes the Host Pool Sizing info, would that do what you're wanting?
It would allow you to remove the specific host you're wanting to remove and update the Autoscale settings at the same time.

 

1
Avatar
Johnny Lambert

I like your idea of doing it there in the remove host section. Because now if we wanted to be specific, we would have to turn off Auto Scale > Delete the host we want gone > Configure Auto scale for one less base host pool capacity > turn on Auto-scale. If we could do it from remove host that would be killer. 

I agree with "Is it worth the cost?" something like you're proposing is much worth the DEV time.

0
Avatar
Dave Stephenson

Awesome!
Glad we were able to help design something that helps solve for your original ask without adding too much complexity. (hopefully other partners feel the same way 🤞)
The alternative like you said, is clunky and easy to miss a step.🙂

0
Avatar
Chuck Mikuzis

Good Morning Johnny Lambert I'm working with our dev team reviewing this and we may already have a solution in place.  I this scenario where the base host capacity is decreased, those host above the base capacity would be considered hosts that "burst" beyond the base capacity.  We currently do have an option that will remove the host that was the oldest provisioned host, which can be found in the auto-scale properties here in the "Scale In Restrictions":


We'll research the ability to scale-in alphabetically, but please let us know if this helps in the meantime.  Thank you!

Please sign in to leave a comment.