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

OwnerReference should not be set on PVC claim template, this needs more work to figure out the correct semantic #278

Closed
gtully opened this issue Jul 28, 2022 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@gtully
Copy link
Contributor

gtully commented Jul 28, 2022

Describe the bug
We currently set the owner reference on the PVC template for the SS to the ArtemisCR, deleting the ArtemisCR deletes the PVC and release any PV, any PV with retain retain policy of Delete goes away as expected.
To persist data, a PV needs a retain policy.
However, leaving the PVC around allowed a non Retain PV to survive as in use.

There still needs to be some way to cleanup PVC's as the data retention is a function of the PV retention policy, however this gc/cleanup needs to be more carefully considered.
I will rollback the changes from #244
and verify that the PVC remains.

An owner reference may still be the best approach, lets see.

Additional context
If the ArtemisCR has persistenceEnabled=true, then it needs a PV with policy Retain to match its PVC.

@gtully gtully added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 28, 2022
@gtully gtully self-assigned this Jul 28, 2022
@gtully
Copy link
Contributor Author

gtully commented Jul 28, 2022

kubernetes/kubernetes#99728 may be the long term answer

gtully added a commit to gtully/activemq-artemis-operator that referenced this issue Jul 28, 2022
…, leave deletion to the user as was the case prior to artemiscloud#244
@gtully
Copy link
Contributor Author

gtully commented Jul 28, 2022

brusdev pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 29, 2022
@gtully gtully closed this as completed Jul 29, 2022
brusdev pushed a commit to brusdev/activemq-artemis-operator that referenced this issue Aug 11, 2022
…, leave deletion to the user as was the case prior to artemiscloud#244

(cherry picked from commit 2b2f2e8)

downstream: ENTMQBR-6886
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant