feat: Use volumeclaim templates in Helm to provsion volumes #254
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: wilmardo <info@wilmardenouden.nl>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current helm setup was not working for me since there was a dynamic volume provisioner within the cluser which tries to create a persistent volume for each claim.
I know this is a breaking change and I am willing to refactor to support both the volumes and a provisioner but I would like to raise the question why.
All Helm charts I come across assume you have a dynamic provisioner deployed, it makes the chart way simpler :)
Just refactored the Helm chart and I am open to refactor the deployment files, but what has example1 for advantage over example2?