[batch] Update gcsfuse version to 1.2.0

[jigold]

Let's see if this "just works".

[danking]

We don’t have lab_release in our Ubuntu image. We could add it to hail Ubuntu or just in-line the name. We had bionic here but that’s 18.04 we really should use jammy.

[danking]

Also looks like we might need to go to 1.1.0 b/c that’s all that’s been released to Apt https://packages.cloud.google.com/apt/dists/gcsfuse-jammy/main/binary-amd64/Packages

[jmarshall]

Looking at the …/Packages URL in the previous comment, 1.2.0 is now available (and 1.1.0 does not appear to be there).

In our recent local hail update deployment, the batch_worker_image job failed repeatedly due to GoogleCloudPlatform/gcsfuse#1424. We worked around this as initially suggested on that issue with populationgenomics/hail@607408b, but later comments on the issue suggest that the better approach would be this PR with an additional change to access the apt repo via https:

-    echo "deb http://packages.cloud.google.com/apt $GCSFUSE_REPO main" | tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/gcsfuse.list && \
+    echo "deb https://packages.cloud.google.com/apt $GCSFUSE_REPO main" | tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/gcsfuse.list && \

[danking]

@jigold can I remove the WIP tag? I'd like this to make it into the 0.2.125 release so that AUS can check out a tagged release.

[jigold]

Yes with the caveat that I was going to look at the worker logs in the PR test namespace just to make sure there were no hidden errors that would be problematic. I broke the logging query generator -- fixed in #13813 -- and didn't think this was urgent. I'll take a look at the logs now without that fix in.

[jigold]

I forgot I turned off the syslog so we won't see errors there from while the worker is running.

Up to you on whether you think this change needs more scrutiny.

[jmarshall]

It's not so much so that we can check out a tagged release, as we have already worked around the problem. But I would expect that you and any other installations will also run into the same batch_worker_image failure.

We have been running our production instance using gcsfuse 1.2.0 for about a week now, and I think @illusional will agree with me that we haven't seen any problems from it.