feat: stateful set persistent volume claim retention policy #5946
Conversation
| @@ -41,14 +41,15 @@ func NewServerStatefulSetReconciler( | |||
| podSpec *v1.PodSpec, | |||
| volumeClaimTemplates []mlopsv1alpha1.PersistentVolumeClaim, | |||
| scaling *mlopsv1alpha1.ScalingSpec, | |||
| policy *appsv1.StatefulSetPersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A suggestion to rename this to volumeClaimRetentionPolicy. Mostly because in the future we might end up with more policies for different things, and to eliminate any confusion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, this is update and renamed to volumeClaimRetentionPolicy
| test.podSpec, | ||
| test.volumeClaimTemplates, | ||
| test.scaling, | ||
| test.statefulSetPersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While you're referencing test.statefulSetPersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy here, this remains null in all the test cases created above. I would add a test case that has an actual retention policy added to the Server and then expect that it appears with the same values in the StatefulSet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have updated a current test, to have PersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy in it :)
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR is to enhance this default behaviour from Core v2, such that a PVC should be released/deleted when the associated STS pod is scaled down or deleted.
Screenshot from unit test
Quick info
From k8s v1.27 we have a beta feature called PersistentVolumeClaim retention StatefulSets which can be used to manage the pvc’s which are created by STS. In Core v2 we are creating the PVC for a model as a part of serverconfig's volumeClaimTemplates spec which will be present in the statefulset which gets created as soon as a server is created.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #INFRA-851