Workflows immediately fail and jobs are never created. about terraform-aws-github-runner

[npalm]

In case the workflows immediately fails you mis most likely the dummy (offline runner). The README contains a section about this issue. Work around is create an offline runner first.

GitHub workflows will fail immediately if there is no action runner available for your builds. Since this module supports to scale from 0 and up, your builds will fail in case there is no active runner available. So we recommend to create an offline runner with matching labels to the configuration. Create this runner by following the GitHub instruction on your local machine. You can stop the process after the step of running the config.sh. This offline runner will ensure your builds will not fail immediately and stay queued until there is a runner to pick it up.

[cmcconnell1]

Hello @npalm thanks for maintaining this project. I am also experiencing similar issues, using v0.2.0 tag.

I have followed the docs:
here: https://github.com/philips-labs/terraform-aws-github-runner
and
https://040code.github.io/2020/05/25/scaling-selfhosted-action-runners

Note that we have some ec2 runners (the Ec2 runners status will change to active when I commit in my test repo that has the github app installed/configured in it--provided the runner is labeled with 'default' again following the docs and per our terraform config), but I still am seeing the error indicating that there is something missing with a label on the self-hosted and 'offline' runner that the docs specify:
ref:

and the logs where I see the error are in the lambda scale down

START RequestId: 466ac7b0-38cf-4c7c-a5cc-676507142a77 Version: $LATEST
2020-07-27T23:12:45.562Z	466ac7b0-38cf-4c7c-a5cc-676507142a77	DEBUG	No active runners found for environment: 'dev-usw2'
END RequestId: 466ac7b0-38cf-4c7c-a5cc-676507142a77
REPORT RequestId: 466ac7b0-38cf-4c7c-a5cc-676507142a77	Duration: 71.19 ms	Billed Duration: 100 ms	Memory Size: 128 MB	Max Memory Used: 128 MB	

I am also seeing an error in the scale-up that relates to SQS and therefore prevents us from successful run of that lamda function, I will open a separate issue for that. Thank you,

[alonsohki]

Thank you @npalm , that worked.

[npalm]

So we can close the issue I guess?

[npalm]

Seems issue is solved, no activity. Closing the issue