Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 40777, 43673)
remove an unnecassary variable assignment in glusterfs_test
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
`path` is exactly the same variable as `volumePath`, which is defined in line 122 . So no needs to assign it.
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 42038, 42083)
Add backup-volfile-servers to mount option.
This feature ensures the `backup servers` in the trusted pool is contacted if there is a failure in the connected server.
Mount option becomes:
mount -t glusterfs -o log-level=ERROR,log-file=/var/lib/kubelet/plugins/kubernetes.io/glusterfs/glustermount/glusterpod-glusterfs.log,backup-volfile-servers=192.168.100.0:192.168.200.0:192.168.43.149 ..
Signed-off-by: Humble Chirammal <hchiramm@redhat.com>
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 41306, 42187, 41666, 42275, 42266)
Implement bulk polling of volumes
This implements Bulk volume polling using ideas presented by
justin in https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/39564
But it changes the implementation to use an interface
and doesn't affect other implementations.
cc @justinsb
This implements Bulk volume polling using ideas presented by
justin in https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/39564
But it changes the implementation to use an interface
and doesn't affect other implementations.
is contacted if there is a failure in the connected server.
Mount option becomes:
mount -t glusterfs -o log-level=ERROR,log-file=/var/lib/kubelet/plugins/kubernetes.io/glusterfs/glustermount/glusterpod-glusterfs.log,backup-volfile-servers=192.168.100.0:192.168.200.0:192.168.43.149 ..
Signed-off-by: Humble Chirammal <hchiramm@redhat.com>
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/volume
cc @jsafrane @spothanis @agonzalezro @justinsb @johscheuer @simonswine @nelcy @pmorie @quofelix @sdminonne @thockin @saad-ali @rootfs
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone lgtms and then someone
experienced in the project approves), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
If You Care About the Process:
------------------------------
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
well: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
Also, see https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/issues/1389.
TLDR:
-----
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the `OWNERS` file to
remove the names of people that shouldn't be reviewing code in the
future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify
the **approvers** section. Names asre sorted by relevance, using some
secret statistics.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an
approver or reviewer of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver
of the subdirectories too, so not all OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 39807, 37505, 39844, 39525, 39109)
fix bug not using volumetype config in create volume
fixes#39843
@humblec
we are building the volumetype config but I don't see where we are using it in the CreateVolume for dyn provisioning, this is why volumetype parameter from the Storage Class was being overlooked because we are hard coding constants like replicaCount which is always 3.
unless I'm missing something?
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38284, 38403, 38265, 38378)
glusterfs: properly check gidMin and gidMax values from SC individually
<!-- Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, read our contributor guidelines https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and developer guide https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/development.md
2. If you want *faster* PR reviews, read how: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/faster_reviews.md
3. Follow the instructions for writing a release note: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/pull-requests.md#release-notes
-->
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
This fixes a misleading debug message, and also prevents the glusterfs provisioner from adapting a misconfiguration of the gid-range in the storage class. Instead it will fail with proper error messages.
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402286
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
<!-- Steps to write your release note:
1. Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state (if you have access)
2. Enter your extended release note in the below block; leaving it blank means using the PR title as the release note. If no release note is required, just write `NONE`.
-->
```release-note
```
Don't override explict out-of max-range configuration, but
fail with an error message instead.
Signed-off-by: Michael Adam <obnox@redhat.com>
Kubernetes Submit Queue