GlusterFS volume plugin should not blindly retry all failed mounts without
auto_unmount, it should retry them only when we are sure that auto_unmount
was the reason the first attempt failed.
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 48074, 47971, 48044, 47514, 47647)
Use more meaningful and consistent variable names in glusterfs plugin.
libfuse has an auto_unmount option which, if enabled, ensures that
the file system is unmounted at FUSE server termination by running a
separate monitor process that performs the unmount when that occurs.
(This feature would probably better be called "robust auto-unmount",
as FUSE servers usually do try to unmount their file systems upon
termination, it's just this mechanism is not crash resilient.)
This change implements that option and behavior for glusterfs.
This option will be only supported for clients with version >3.11.
Signed-off-by: Humble Chirammal <hchiramm@redhat.com>
In some setups, after creation of dynamic PVs and before mounting/using
these PVs in a pod, the endpoint/service got mistakenly deleted by the
user/developer. By making these methods 'plugin' specific, we can call
it from mounter if there are scenarios where the endpoint and service
got wiped in between accidentally.
Signed-off-by: Humble Chirammal hchiramm@redhat.com
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)
Mike Danese