Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Update CSI migration design for volume resizing #3624

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2019
Merged

Update CSI migration design for volume resizing #3624

merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2019

Conversation

leakingtapan
Copy link

Update CSI migration design to include resize migration design.

/cc @ddebroy @davidz627 @gnufied

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Apr 22, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from gnufied April 22, 2019 04:47
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. labels Apr 22, 2019
ddebroy
ddebroy reviewed Apr 22, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ddebroy ddebroy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. One clarification: In the context of resize, no PV specs are involved and thus no translation of specs involved either for migration, correct? Only PVC specs get modified and those do not require translations, right?

@leakingtapan
Copy link
Author

leakingtapan commented Apr 22, 2019 •
edited
Loading

no PV specs are involved and thus no translation of specs involved either for migration

@ddebroy there are PV specs involved when external resizer did it's job and it will update the PV spec to reflect the new size. Given that, we still need to check the migration condition in GenerateExpandVolumeFunc to decide whether to by-pass internal expand controller or not.

@leakingtapan leakingtapan mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2019
Merged
@ddebroy
Copy link
Member

ddebroy commented Apr 30, 2019

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 30, 2019
@saad-ali
Copy link
Member

saad-ali commented May 1, 2019

/approve

/assign @gnufied

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: leakingtapan, saad-ali

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 1, 2019
davidz627
davidz627 reviewed May 1, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@davidz627 davidz627 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks cheng! some additional questions

contributors/design-proposals/storage/csi-migration.md Outdated

To synchronize between expand controller and external resize, external resizer will find provisioner name
using PVC annotation `volume.beta.kubernetes.io/storage-provisioner`. If the name matches to the CSI driver
name, it guarantees that the PV is provisioned by CSI driver, hence external resizer will proceed with
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can you add to the doc why this is guaranteed, and what is the difference between native CSI usage and using CSI through Migration. Do we need to treat those cases differently?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The difference is on which plugin backend is actually used. For in-tree volume, it will be in-tree provisioner name; for CSI volume, it will be CSI driver name. Updated doc

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from msau42 May 1, 2019 00:19
@davidz627
Copy link
Contributor

/hold
until comments resolved

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 1, 2019
gnufied
gnufied reviewed May 1, 2019
View reviewed changes
contributors/design-proposals/storage/csi-migration.md Outdated
annotation to let external resizer to react on it.

#### Online Resizing
//TODO: Design
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For online resizing - we just need to ensure that we perform spec conversion before calling into volume plugin interface. Once we do that, rest of the code should delegate correctly to CSI driver and work as expected.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also - online resizing won't require anything special on the controller. it just requires changes in the volume_manager's call.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 1, 2019
@leakingtapan leakingtapan changed the title [WIP] Update CSI migration design for volume resizing Update CSI migration design for volume resizing May 1, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 1, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 13, 2019
@gnufied
Copy link
Member

gnufied commented May 13, 2019

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 13, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 16, 2019
@davidz627
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/hold cancel

Thanks @leakingtapan, this looks great!

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels May 17, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 7d8802b into kubernetes:master May 17, 2019
@leakingtapan leakingtapan deleted the resize-design branch May 20, 2019 18:15
MadhavJivrajani pushed a commit to MadhavJivrajani/community that referenced this pull request Nov 30, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Merge pull request kubernetes#3624 from leakingtapan/resize-design
a974d76 
Update CSI migration design for volume resizing
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gnufied gnufied gnufied left review comments

@davidz627 davidz627 davidz627 left review comments

@ddebroy ddebroy ddebroy left review comments

@msau42 msau42 msau42 left review comments

Assignees

@gnufied gnufied

@davidz627 davidz627

@ddebroy ddebroy

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@leakingtapan @ddebroy @saad-ali @k8s-ci-robot @davidz627 @gnufied @msau42