-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 813
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Change fsGroupPolicy to File #1377
Change fsGroupPolicy to File #1377
Conversation
Signed-off-by: ConnorJC <github@connorjc.io>
Hi @ConnorJC3. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
/ok-to-test |
Is the driver going to support read-write-many multi-attach volumes? It seems like standard filesystems like ext4, XFS does not have necessary fencing to multi-attach same volume in write mode. If multi-attach will only support read-only, we should still be fine with |
EBS has multiple writer support for multi-attach volumes, but I've heard it's very wonky and has several limitations. I haven't tested but I assume they at least partially deal with the filesystem issue on their end? There's a long-open PR for multi-atrach support that would allow multiple writers (#1178), but it needs serious reworking and probably won't be merged anytime soon. |
/lgtm |
/lgtm |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ConnorJC3, gnufied The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
This changes immutable field in CSIDriver resource on existing deployments. It was undefined previously and therefore kubernetes sets it to How this change is expected to be applied by end user? |
Hmm. not a helm person, but is there a way it could delete and recreate the resource for immutable fields? We do that in our operators when something immutable has to be changed inside an object. :( |
@gnufied unfortunately, as far as I can tell, no. You might be able to get that behavior with |
See #1365 (comment)
This might need to be revisited in the future with multi-attach volumes, but for now is 100% safe.