-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
Can't use ReadOnlyMany volume restored from Snapshot with controller-publish-readonly provisioner option #872
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
Comments
cc: @humblec -- might be interesting to you... |
/cc @leiyiz Leiyi has just disabled rw mounting for rox volumes, or at least tried to. It looks like the disk is actually mounted read-only, maybe there was some problem with the filesystem that made the driver think it wasn't formatted correctly? |
will need to try that out to be sure... yeah I think mounter somehow think there's no filesystem? |
@tsmetana can you please list the PV spec associated with |
controller publish (GCE PD attach to VM), node stage (mount on host), node publish (bind mount to host mount) |
the fix is out and this workflow should work once the fix is merged and released |
Thanks @mattcary , one other thing I wanted to make sure here was the |
Here's a PV/PVC pair from a GKE cluster (before @leiyiz's fix). Note the PV is ROX but readOnly is not set in the csi spec.
|
if you are using external provisioner |
When using the new
controller-publish-readonly
command-line option in the external provisioner sidecar, the ReadOnlyMany volumes seem to be still attempted to be mounted read-write. Moreover it looks like when the ROX volume is restored from snapshot, the kubelet still attempts to even create a filesystem on it.Reproducer:
Result:
Pod fails to start with message similar to this one in the log:
This looks to be incorrect: the volume should not be attempted to be mounted read-write and the attempt to create a filesystem on a formatted drive pre-populated with data looks quite dangerous. I will try to tinker with this but if someone reading this had an idea, I'm interested. I'm also not sure who exactly is at fault here: might be also kubelet.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: