-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 581
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
[Docs] Provide an option to deploy to GCP via Opta without requiring a registered domain #2729
Comments
I think this is an issue for AWS as well. You should be able to just remove the |
The data proxy service is missing in the example configmap. |
Hello 👋, This issue has been inactive for over 9 months. To help maintain a clean and focused backlog, we'll be marking this issue as stale and will close the issue if we detect no activity in the next 7 days. Thank you for your contribution and understanding! 🙏 |
Hello 👋, This issue has been inactive for over 9 months and hasn't received any updates since it was marked as stale. We'll be closing this issue for now, but if you believe this issue is still relevant, please feel free to reopen it. Thank you for your contribution and understanding! 🙏 |
The current reference implementation for GCP is maintained here |
Description
Background
Ref: This slack thread. Some users may wish to have a simple deployment-to-GCP option, but do not currently have a registered domain they wish to bind to Flyte. @jeevb provided a sample Envoy configuration that allows one to port-forward a single port from Kubernetes and have access to the UI without exposing to a domain. The suggestion is to add this Envoy option to the GCP deployment docs.
Files
The following was provided by @jeevb (with some simplifications in the config):
envoy.yaml
config.yaml
Directions
kubectl -n flyte create configmap flyte-proxy-config --from-file config.yaml
kubect -n flyte apply -f envoy.yaml
kubectl -n flyte port-forward deployment/flyte-proxy 30080:8000
~/.flyte/config.yaml
to point to `localhost:8000"Are you sure this issue hasn't been raised already?
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: