In general, we should doc it, and have QE test it. We should probably have an admin command that does this, because it comes up often enough. oc create persistentvolume X ... --claim-ref=...
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Mark Turansky <mtura...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccole...@redhat.com> > wrote: >> >> Pre binding is something an admin can do as well, I assume? That's our >> short term story for "here's how I preallocate a claim"? > > > > Yes, if the admin knows how to make a ClaimRef for pv.Spec.ClaimRef. > > As a feature, this is currently undocumented and untested through QE. > > >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Mark Turansky <mtura...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> And to be specific, when the PV is provisioned *for that claim*, it will >> be pre-bound to that claim and only that claim will match it. >> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Mark Turansky <mtura...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> No, dynamic provisioning currently uses an annotation on the claim in >>> 3.2. The PVSelector on claim will be used for the expanded set of >>> provisioners in 3.3. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccole...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I thought the PV "I want this claim" annotation was in 3.2 for dynamic >>>> provisioning? >>>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Mark Turansky <mtura...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccole...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Do we have doc on how an admin can target a PV to a given PVC? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Not yet, but Volumes documentation should be updated when that feature >>>> goes live in 3.3. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 1:48 PM, Mark Turansky <mtura...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Marc, >>>>> >>>>> We're currently developing the ability to label PVs and add a selector >>>>> to a claim. This will help a claim target a specific PV. That is slated >>>>> for our 3.3 release. Until then, there's no way to deterministically >>>>> bind a >>>>> pvc to a pv. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Marc Boorshtein >>>>> <mboorsht...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I'm missing something. My container requires several >>>>>> persistent volumes for configuration data. Right now the only way I can >>>>>> guarantee that the PVC maps to the PV I want is to do them in order >>>>>> (create >>>>>> PV1, create PVC1, create PV2, create PVC2, etc). This works fine, but >>>>>> I'd >>>>>> like to create a template and I get the feeling this strategy won't work >>>>>> well. Is there a way I can tell os to bind a PVC to a specific PV based >>>>>> on >>>>>> the PV's metadata? Or is there a better way to do this that I'm >>>>>> completely >>>>>> missing? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Marc >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >>>>>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> users mailing list >>>>> users@lists.openshift.redhat.com >>>>> http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users >>>> >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@lists.openshift.redhat.com http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
