-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 371
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
DeleteVolumeGroupSnapshot API - part 1 #882
DeleteVolumeGroupSnapshot API - part 1 #882
Conversation
|
/assign @xing-yang |
|
||
/* | ||
TODO: Add finalizer to group snapshot | ||
TODO: Add PVC finalizer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need PVC finalizer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is an open question I had - do we add any finalisers to PVCs, similar to the case for individual VolumeSnapshots?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, we do need to add PVC finalizers when creating a snapshot from it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So will the individual snapshot creation handle that, or does the group snapshot also need to add a finaliser?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since the creation of the individual VolumeSnapshot API objects (that are part of a group snapshot) are handled by the group snapshot controller, the PVC finalizer should also be added by the group snapshot controller. Let me know if you see any problems.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the first revision, let's try to separate the logic as much as possible to avoid introducing regression to the existing volume snapshot feature.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm going to merge this PR. Please address this comment in a followup PR.
3edce23
to
49306f3
Compare
Can you add a release note? |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: RaunakShah, xing-yang 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 |
/hold |
Actually can you please squash the commits? After that we can cancel the hold. |
5e44057
to
facefba
Compare
Done |
/hold cancel |
/lgtm |
This message is removed upstream and in newer openshift versions: * kubernetes-csi#882 * openshift#139
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds logic to delete volume group snapshots.
Currently, Only the volume group snapshots and corresponding volume group snapshot contents are deleted. The logic to delete individual snapshots will be added in a separate PR.
Testing
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: