-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 241
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
feat: add helm deploy for edge #1056
feat: add helm deploy for edge #1056
Conversation
Hi @vie-serendipity. 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-sigs/prow repository. |
deploy/chart/templates/plugin.yaml
Outdated
kind: DaemonSet | ||
apiVersion: apps/v1 | ||
metadata: | ||
name: csi-plugin | ||
namespace: {{ .Release.Namespace }} | ||
name: {{ .name }} |
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.
Can we just use the key in .Values.nodepools as the name? e.g.
{{ if eq $key "default" }}
name: csi-plugin
{{ else }}
name: csi-pluign-{{ $key }}
{{ end }}
We can avoid possible duplicated name in this way.
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 personally think it's more readable to explicitly clarify names of each node pool. It makes no real difference compared to using $key as we do now.
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.
OK. But this way we lost a level of abstraction. e.g. kubectl get pods -l nodepool=edge
seems more reasonable than -l nodepool=csi-plugin-edge
How about
{{ if eq $key "default" }}
name: csi-plugin
{{ else }}
name: csi-pluign-{{ .name }}
{{ end }}
the name of default pool can still be used in label.
values-edge.yaml is the config we use in our ACK Edge cluster. I think we'd better keep its name. |
7a3ed37
to
575683d
Compare
575683d
to
f7919fb
Compare
f7919fb
to
8d744a3
Compare
8d744a3
to
89556c6
Compare
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 rebase and apply these change
diff --git a/deploy/chart/templates/plugin.yaml b/deploy/chart/templates/plugin.yaml
index 2ee66ad7..3092b4dd 100644
--- a/deploy/chart/templates/plugin.yaml
+++ b/deploy/chart/templates/plugin.yaml
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ spec:
mountPath: /var/lib/kubelet/
mountPropagation: "Bidirectional"
{{- range $key := tuple "disk" "nas" "oss" }}
- {{- with index $.Values.csi $key -}}
+ {{- with index $nodePool.csi $key -}}
{{- if .enabled }}
- name: {{ $key }}-plugin-dir
mountPath: /csi/{{ $key }}plugin.csi.alibabacloud.com
@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ spec:
hostPath:
path: /var/lib/kubelet
type: Directory
-{{- range $key, $val := .Values.csi }}
+{{- range $key, $val := $nodePool.csi }}
{{- if $val.enabled }}
- name: {{ $key }}-plugin-dir
hostPath:
1cd8141
to
fdc352c
Compare
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: huww98, mowangdk, vie-serendipity 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
Deploy multi daemonsets using values-nodepools according to affinity. And csi config will overwrite the original config.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: