Add support for "multi-zone" volume handle provisioning and deletion #1733
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: pwschuurman 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
approved
pwschuurman
force-pushed
the
multi-zone-provisioning
branch
3 times, most recently
from
1dfb01c to
ea2b8e0
Compare
|
/assign @mattcary |
mattcary
reviewed
Jun 5, 2024
mattcary
reviewed
Jun 5, 2024
pwschuurman
force-pushed
the
multi-zone-provisioning
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a42518c to
95ebafa
Compare
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
pwschuurman
force-pushed
the
multi-zone-provisioning
branch
3 times, most recently
from
b321f76 to
c64c6e1
Compare
msau42
reviewed
Jun 7, 2024
| @@ -62,9 +63,10 @@ func GCEClientAndDriverSetup(instance *remote.InstanceInfo, driverConfig DriverC | |||
| fmt.Sprintf("--extra-labels=%s=%s", DiskLabelKey, DiskLabelValue), | |||
| "--max-concurrent-format-and-mount=20", // otherwise the serialization times out the e2e test. | |||
| "--multi-zone-volume-handle-enable", | |||
| "--multi-zone-volume-handle-disk-types=pd-standard", | |||
| "--multi-zone-volume-handle-disk-types=pd-standard,hyperdisk-ml", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought it was pd-ssd instead of pd-standard?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is just a testing configuration. But I agree, I don't think anyone would want to enable --multi-zone-volume-handle-disk-types on pd-standard. Should I update the existing tests to use pd-ssd instead?
pwschuurman
force-pushed
the
multi-zone-provisioning
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8afd4ed to
45c4624
Compare
pwschuurman
force-pushed
the
multi-zone-provisioning
branch
from
45c4624 to
cc6957f
Compare
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
Add support for
multi-zonevolume handle provisioning. Volumes created with theenable-multi-zone-provisioning: trueparameter will be created with multiple underlying disks, one per specified zone. The underlying volume returned will specify the keywordmulti-zonein place of thezonefield. See #1616 for more details on the syntax.Multi-zone volumes can be created from three sources:
Deletion will inspect all disks that match the volume handle name, for all zones in the driver's default region.
Special notes for your reviewer:
This adds some additional e2e tests, that are not yet runnable, due to API support being in alpha. These have been run on a locally project that has alpha support, and can be replicated by running:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: