feat(ec2): support for the credit configuration mode for burstable instances#28728
feat(ec2): support for the credit configuration mode for burstable instances#28728mergify[bot] merged 19 commits intoaws:mainfrom
Conversation
aws-cdk-automation
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
go-to-k
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this PR.
The implementation looks good. I made some comments.
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Specifying the CPU credit type for burstable EC2 instance types (T2, T3, T3a, etc). | ||
| * T3 instances with `host` tenancy do not support the unlimited CPU credit option. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This document appears to be taken from the L1 or CFn text.
The host here refers to the tenancy property of CfnInstanceProps, which is not visible in the L2 construct. Wouldn't it therefore be more appropriate to use the word dedicated host?
Otherwise, users may be get confused (like me).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@go-to-k
Indeed, you're right. I've updated the sentence, so please check it.
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Specifying the CPU credit type for burstable EC2 instance types (T2, T3, T3a, etc). | ||
| * T3 instances with `host` tenancy do not support the unlimited CPU credit option. |
|
|
||
| // if credit specification is set, then the instance type must be burstable | ||
| if (props.creditSpecification && !props.instanceType.isBurstable()) { | ||
| throw new Error(`creditSpecification is not supported for ${props.instanceType.toString()} instance type`); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about outputting which instance types are supported?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since there are already tests for Nat instances, how about putting them in here instead of adding new files? If they are scattered, the contributors will not know which file to put them in when adding tests for Nat instances in the future.
(But if you have a particular intention, I will respect that.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hadn't noticed the existing test code. Thank you for your suggestion.
2f6b436 to
06a904c
Compare
|
@go-to-k Thank you for your review! I have addressed your comments. |
go-to-k
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your change, I made some comments again.
|
@go-to-k Thank you! I have made the revisions again. |
Co-authored-by: k.goto <24818752+go-to-k@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: k.goto <24818752+go-to-k@users.noreply.github.com>
0a2e48d to
779fe6d
Compare
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
In this PR, I have enabled the setting of the credit configuration mode for EC2 instances and NAT instances in burstable performance instances.
Closes #19166.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license