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

only copy over the queue information to the worker static config #311

Conversation

thisisibrahimd
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@thisisibrahimd thisisibrahimd self-assigned this Aug 22, 2022
@L1ghtman2k
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@thisisibrahimd
Copy link
Member Author

I am getting errors when deploying to non default namespaces. The daemonsets are only getting deployed to default namespace.

@L1ghtman2k
Copy link
Member

I am getting errors when deploying to non default namespaces. The daemonsets are only getting deployed to default namespace.

This might not be related to this issue? I don't think worker CFG decides where workers get deployed. I think this is just how app behaved all along, and we could track this as a separate issue

@L1ghtman2k
Copy link
Member

Hm, interesting app has access to deploy to other namespaces, Perhaps we can downgrade perms from cluster role, to role for this one

@thisisibrahimd
Copy link
Member Author

It might not be related to this issue, but an interesting issue for sure. I am assuming it was never deployed in a non default namespace for lockdown because nsq would not work at all.
Though, the cfg from the master cfg.platform.namespace is used to decide namespace meta object for daemonset spec and pod spec.

Will decrease the perms for cluster role then.

@L1ghtman2k
Copy link
Member

I think we can do following:

  • Allow overwriting namespace field for workers, but by default deploy it in the same namespace as mater

@L1ghtman2k
Copy link
Member

#312

@thisisibrahimd
Copy link
Member Author

good to go.

@thisisibrahimd thisisibrahimd merged commit 527df3c into master Aug 22, 2022
@thisisibrahimd thisisibrahimd deleted the 283-removal-of-sensitive-and-unrelated-information-passed-to-workers branch October 29, 2022 18:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Removal of sensitive, and unrelated information passed to workers
2 participants