Skip to content

Skip placement groups for AWS Capacity Blocks - #4345

Merged
r4victor merged 3 commits into
masterfrom
issue_4344_aws_capacity_blocks_cluster_fleet
Oct 7, 2026
Merged

r4victor merged 3 commits into
masterfrom
issue_4344_aws_capacity_blocks_cluster_fleet

Conversation

@r4victor

@r4victor r4victor commented Oct 7, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes #4344
Fixes #4346

  • On AWS, a cluster fleet provisioned into a Capacity Block no longer gets a placement group, since AWS rejects Capacity Block launches that specify one and already co-locates Capacity Block instances in EC2 UltraClusters.
  • Compute.are_placement_groups_compatible_with_reservations(backend_type) is replaced by are_placement_groups_compatible_with_reservation(instance_offer, reservation) so that backends can decide per reservation, and both provisioning paths now call it via run_async because the AWS implementation makes an API call.
  • get_reservation() gets an active_only flag so a Capacity Block is recognized before it starts, and no longer fails when AWS omits ReservationType, as it does for regular capacity reservations.
  • Runs in a fleet with reservation now launch into that reservation even if the run doesn't set reservation itself, since the default run_job() and the placement group check now use the effective requirements instead of the job spec.

AWS rejects launches into Capacity Blocks that specify a placement group. Fixes #4344.
AWS omits ReservationType for regular capacity reservations.
@r4victor
r4victor merged commit 07174d9 into master Oct 7, 2026
11 of 26 checks passed
@r4victor
r4victor deleted the issue_4344_aws_capacity_blocks_cluster_fleet branch October 7, 2026 08:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

1 participant