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.

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

refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice #1264

Merged

Conversation

prateekpandey14
Copy link
Contributor

@prateekpandey14 prateekpandey14 commented Jun 7, 2019

What this PR does / why we need it:

With latest cstor pool configuration changes, to create StoragePoolClaim we have to
use spc type: blockdevice as common type to create Storagepool based on either disk or sparse.

The type specific info i.e. Sparse and Disk has been move to the BlockDeviceClaim resource.

1. New SPC example where type: blockdevice has been set for all.

apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: blockdevice
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false

2. Old SPC example where we have to set type: sparse to create a sparse based pool.

apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: sparse
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false

Refer PR #1255 for more details

Signed-off-by: prateekpandey14 [email protected]

Checklist:

  • Fixes #
  • Labelled this PR & related issue with documentation tag
  • PR messages has document related information
  • Labelled this PR & related issue with breaking-changes tag
  • PR messages has breaking changes related information
  • Labelled this PR & related issue with requires-upgrade tag
  • PR messages has upgrade related information
  • Commit has unit tests
  • Commit has integration tests

@prateekpandey14 prateekpandey14 changed the title Refact(cstor-pool,spare): Update SPC type to blockdevice Refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice Jun 7, 2019
@prateekpandey14 prateekpandey14 changed the title Refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice Jun 7, 2019
With latest changes, to create StoragePoolClaim we have to
use spc type blockdevice as common type instead of sparse/disk
for creating sparse or disk based cstor pools

```
apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: blockdevice
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false
```

Signed-off-by: prateekpandey14 <[email protected]>
Copy link

@mittachaitu mittachaitu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/LGTM

Copy link

@mittachaitu mittachaitu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@vishnuitta vishnuitta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

changes are good

@vishnuitta vishnuitta merged commit 430d769 into openebs-archive:master Jun 7, 2019
@prateekpandey14 prateekpandey14 deleted the update-sparse-pool branch June 7, 2019 15:04
mittachaitu pushed a commit to mittachaitu/maya that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2019
…chive#1264)

With latest changes, to create StoragePoolClaim we have to
use spc type blockdevice as common type instead of sparse/disk
for creating sparse or disk based cstor pools

```
apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: blockdevice
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false
```

Signed-off-by: prateekpandey14 <[email protected]>
prateekpandey14 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2019
…unclaimed BD in manual mode (#1267)

* refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice (#1264)

With latest changes, to create StoragePoolClaim we have to
use spc type blockdevice as common type instead of sparse/disk
for creating sparse or disk based cstor pools

```
apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: blockdevice
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false
```

Signed-off-by: prateekpandey14 <[email protected]>

* feat(cstor-operator): add a support to create pools on unclaimed BD in manual mode (#1255)

Signed-off-by: mittachaitu <[email protected]>
AmitKumarDas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2019
…ckdeviceclaim (#1270)

* refact(cstor-pool,sparse): Update SPC type to blockdevice (#1264)

With latest changes, to create StoragePoolClaim we have to
use spc type blockdevice as common type instead of sparse/disk
for creating sparse or disk based cstor pools

```
apiVersion: openebs.io/v1alpha1
kind: StoragePoolClaim
metadata:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
spec:
  name: sparse-claim-auto
  type: blockdevice
  maxPools: 1
  minPools: 1
  poolSpec:
    poolType: striped
    cacheFile: /var/openebs/sparse/sparse-claim-auto.cache
    overProvisioning: false
```

Signed-off-by: prateekpandey14 <[email protected]>

* feat(cstor-operator): add a support to create pools on unclaimed BD in manual mode (#1255)

Signed-off-by: mittachaitu <[email protected]>

* fix(blockdeviceclaims): fix openebs version type in blockdeviceclaim (#1269)

Signed-off-by: mittachaitu <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants