Default instance type for Azure does not permit the azure-premium storage pool

[Tim McNamara]

The VM instance type that Juju uses by default does not support the azure-premium storage pool that created by default

$ juju version
2.6.6-disco-amd64
$ juju deploy swift-storage
$ juju list-storage-pools
Name Provider Attrs
azure azure
azure-premium azure account-type=Premium_LRS
loop loop
rootfs rootfs
tmpfs tmpfs

$ juju add-storage swift-storage/0 block-devices=azure-premium,,1
$ juju status --storage
...
swift-storage/0 block-devices/0 block azure-premium 1.0GiB attaching compute.VirtualMachinesClient#CreateOrUpdate: Failure sending request: StatusCode=400 -- Original Error: Code="InvalidParameter" Message="Requested operation cannot be performed because the VM size Standard_A1 does not support the storage account type Premium_LRS of disk 'volume-40. Consider updating the VM to a size that supports Premium storage." Target="dataDisk.managedDisk.storageAccountType"

[Tim McNamara (tim-clicks)]

Should we increase the size of the default instance type or remove creating the azure-premium storage pool by default?

[John A Meinel (jameinel)]

We already have a mechanism for asking for a different instance type for
your instances (juju deploy swift-storage --constraints
"instance-type=XXX"). I don't think the default instance type has to
support everything you might want to do. If it is trivial to do so (eg,
doesn't cost people more money on the default instance type), then it is
fine to change our default instance type. But it doesn't seem like a deal
breaker to require people who know they want to use premium storage to
request instances that will be able to use premium storage. (We don't
currently support changing an instance type in-situ, but you can 'juju
set-constraints" to set a new instance type, create a new unit using that
instance type, and remove the old unit.)
I think a better focus would be spending the time on something like being
able to update instance types.

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 8:10 AM Tim McNamara <email address hidden>
wrote:

> Should we increase the size of the default instance type or remove
> creating the azure-premium storage pool by default?
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju.
> Matching subscriptions: juju bugs
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835691
>
> Title:
> Default instance type for Azure does not permit the azure-premium
> storage pool
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1835691/+subscriptions
>

[Tim McNamara (tim-clicks)]

I filled the bug because I felt that if options are enabled by default
(e.g. creating a storage pool) then they should probably work by default.

My suspicion is that this is in-effect a regression caused by Azure
changing its policies.

But perhaps my concern is a non-issue and the ticket can be closed?
Defintely agree that other areas are higher priorities. We can address it
if we receive any complaints from the field.

On Mon, 8 Jul 2019, 20:15 John A Meinel <<email address hidden> wrote:

> We already have a mechanism for asking for a different instance type for
> your instances (juju deploy swift-storage --constraints
> "instance-type=XXX"). I don't think the default instance type has to
> support everything you might want to do.
>

[Anastasia (anastasia-macmood)]

Based on the comments, I'll mark as Won't Fix.