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

Verify that PV which is under use can't be accidentally deleted. #134

Closed
AmitKumarDas opened this issue Jun 15, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

Verify that PV which is under use can't be accidentally deleted. #134

AmitKumarDas opened this issue Jun 15, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@AmitKumarDas
Copy link
Member

Hopefully, it will be the K8s openEBS volume provisioner & provider who will work together to get the creation & deletion validation
@AmitKumarDas
Copy link
Member Author

Should there be any validation token from K8s OpenEBS volume provisioner that lets maya api server create or delete a PV (VSM in OpenEBS terms)

@kmova kmova changed the title Will maya api server with K8s as its orchestration provider validate if a PV should be eligible for creation or deletion Verify that PV which is under use can't be accidentally deleted. Mar 19, 2018
@kmova
Copy link
Member

kmova commented Mar 28, 2018

This is fixed in K8s 1.10:

@kmova kmova closed this as completed Mar 28, 2018
sachinmukherjee pushed a commit to sachinmukherjee/openebs that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2018
@kmova
add profile feature in maya types (openebs#134)
ec6cc6d 
* introduce k8s based storage class utility file
* fix a minor doc issue while implementing openebs#717

1. Why is this change necessary ?

This is a part of bigger scheme of things. It will
enable part implementation of openebs#693
openebs#694 and openebs#409

This particular implementation fixes openebs#717

2. How does this change address the issue ?

- Adds a k8s_storage_class.go file

- Adds a few labels, keys & utility functions
w.r.t storage class

3. How to verify this change ?

- make should work fine

- The actual verfication will be part of
bigger changes mentioned in above issues.

4. What side effects does this change have ?

- None

- Unit test should be implemented as mentioned in
openebs#725
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@AmitKumarDas @vharsh @kmova