-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
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
Add tech preview features
struct to DPA CRD, add enableDataMover
flag to DPA features
, data-mover controller deployment and data-mover csi plugin
#727
Conversation
/woof |
In response to this:
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. |
/retest |
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 should be configurable from the DPA spec, a user needs to explicitly enable this feature for 1.1 since we are tech-preview.
|
enableDataMover
flag to DPA, data-mover controller deployment and data-mover csi plugin
…s for dm controller
ce33ca3
to
2e3753f
Compare
@dymurray Added a new spec |
/retest |
config/crd/bases/oadp.openshift.io_dataprotectionapplications.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Please apply all bundle changes in config/ then use make bundle
to generate updated bundle. Reach out if you have any questions.
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.
Overall changes look sane to me. Couple questions
api/v1alpha1/oadp_types.go
Outdated
|
||
// EnableDataMover is used to specify whether you want to deploy the volume snapshot mover controller and a modified csi datamover plugin | ||
// +optional | ||
EnableDataMover bool `json:"enableDataMover,omitempty"` |
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 was wondering, is it worth adding a new type TechPreviewConfiguration
that hides this behind a pointer? This would allow us to change this API as we go to GA if upstream velero makes this totally native.
Then if we have other tech preview features in the future we can always use this field.
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.
Using UnsupportedOverrides config would not require CRD changes. This maybe better approach as we discuss final api.
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.
@dymurray I am not sure if TechPreviewConfigutarion
is the right naming here, I am unsure. Can we not rely on the docs to let the users know that this is a tech-preview feature ? Or is it the right way to do from the API side as you suggested ?
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.
yeah but this will be a supported field, just maybe something we don't keep around in future versions. So I don't think unsupportedOverrides is the correct place for 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.
I don't know what the right naming is... but my thought is as we add new features down the line we may not want to keep adding new bools to the top level of the spec.
What about Features
and documentation covers what is tech-preview and what isn't? This way it goes:
features:
enableDataMover: true
and if data mover becomes a first class citizen down the line we just rip it out of the feature set?
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.
Cool, I like features
more and its combination with the docs. Will be similar to what Velero
does
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.
@dymurray updated the PR, PTAL, Thanks !
enableDataMover
flag to DPA, data-mover controller deployment and data-mover csi pluginfeatures
struct to DPA CRD, add enableDataMover
flag to DPA features
, data-mover controller deployment and data-mover csi plugin
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.
please add a few comments regarding what each images does.
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.
Tested PR and worked for me, agree with tiger on the unsupported override field for CSI plugin.
Please also rename the data mover deployment to be volume-snapshot-mover
Please add missing CRDs for volume snapshot mover as well |
/test 4.10-operator-e2e-gcp |
Could be another PR.
Add above to
Would resolve operator-sdk warnings as well as provide default template in openshift web console yaml view when creating these resources.
|
@shubham-pampattiwar: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
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.
Tested these changes and was able to complete a backup and restore successfully using data mover.
backup/restore workflow worked with these changes! |
In response to this:
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. |
Thank you everyone for the PR review and feedback. Going ahead with the merge. |
This PR does the following:
features
for OADP tech preview features, this PR adds the first tech preview feature - a boolean flag calledenableDataMover
.ReconcileDataMoverController
which enables the deployment of volume-snapshot-mover based on theenableDataMover
flag.enableDataMover
flagunsupportedOverrides
support for data-mover controller