Per discussion today about busted AMIs ending up in workerTypes.
Should we also mark a worker type (somehow) as disabled, if the AMI is dropped at a later point in time? If so, we should probably work out how to display it differently in the UI, and also work out how we want to monitor/alert on it. I'll also raise a separate bug about fixing the script in generic worker to reverse the order of deleting old ami and updating worker type with new ami during worker-type update process...
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 3 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 1159637
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.