Skip to Main Content
Status Not under consideration
Workspace * IBM Cloud Ideas
Categories Containers
Created by Guest
Created on Mar 25, 2019

Change Kubernetes worker node machine type in place

This is derived from a GitHub issue for the IBM Cloud terraform provider. The request there is to make it possible to change the machine type of the worker nodes of a Kubernetes cluster.

It is not possible to change the machine type via terraform without destroying the Kubernetes cluster. A new API has to be added for this to be then exposed via terraform as far as I understood. 

https://github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/issues/527

Idea priority High
  • Guest
    Dec 16, 2020

    The workaround is fine. At the time of this request, we did not work with worker pools. But in the meantime we do, so that works for us.

  • Guest
    Dec 3, 2020

    From Sai Vennam :
    "As per the workaround defined by Chris, I wanted to add some details for Terraform. The IBM Cloud Terraform Provider implementation for IKS allows the user to define worker pools. This would allow you to change the worker type without destroying the cluster. User must define their own worker pools instead of simply setting the default worker-type for the default pool."

  • Guest
    Dec 1, 2020

    From Christopher Rosen:
    "Yes we don't allow this in IKS or ROKS, you need to deploy a new pool and delete the default pool. Status changed to reflect this. "

  • Guest
    Sep 11, 2020

    Following up to see if you were able to test and resolve?

  • Guest
    Jun 20, 2020

    It depends on the process of switching worker pools. If I can just change the machine type in the resource definition and the terraform provider automatically creates the new worker pool and then deletes the old one, perfect. I did not test this yet.

  • Guest
    Jun 17, 2020

    The correct answer here is to create a new pool and delete the older pool, as the IKS team will not support changing the machine type in place. The flow to switch out worker pools is supported today. Does this satisfy the requirement?

  • Guest
    Jun 17, 2020

    reassigned to Sai Vennam

  • Guest
    Mar 28, 2019

    Ruben, thank you for the suggestion. The IKS team does feel this is within their scope. As indicated, we are working with you in the GH issue you opened toward a solution path.