-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 89
Proposal to use tags for tracking PowerVS cluster resources #2364
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: arshadd-b The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Hi @arshadd-b. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-ibmcloud ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
/ok-to-test |
/retitle Proposal to use tags for tracking PowerVS cluster resources |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the delete flow diagram, I think If is not needed inside the rhombus as its already a decision block
In create flow diagram I think you missed to consider COSInstance
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR, Most of the things are good,lets update it bit more to make it better.
48c48f4
to
e0b2d89
Compare
done |
e0b2d89
to
d862267
Compare
d862267
to
0f4cb6b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @arshadd-b, Thank you for the proposal!
I'm not clear on how user tags will be used apart from the controller tag. Can you please share more details on it?
Hi @Amulyam24 , It is the same functionality that we do from UI, adding tags to IBM Cloud resources if user wants to tag resources. It can help to user in resource management. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @Amulyam24 , It is the same functionality that we do from UI, adding tags to IBM Cloud resources if user wants to tag resources. It can help to user in resource management.
Got it, Thanks for the clarification.
A couple of suggestions have been added.
In the create flow diagram, how about we enhance the condition such as cluster.spec.UserTags > 0
, then proceed to attach user provided tags.
- Currently TransitGateway Connections doesn't support tagging, So we will handle deletion of connections based on VPC. | ||
- DHCP Server doesn't support tagging, So we will tag DHCP Network and handle deletion based on Network. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- Currently TransitGateway Connections doesn't support tagging, So we will handle deletion of connections based on VPC. | |
- DHCP Server doesn't support tagging, So we will tag DHCP Network and handle deletion based on Network. | |
Currently transit gateway connections and DHCP server don't support tagging. We will handle their deletion using the VPC and network tag respectively. |
When DHCP server is created, we use its network right, is that taggable?
should we depend on workspace resource tag instead?
cc @Karthik-K-N
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Amulyam24 Actually there is ause case when workspace is already created but DHCP network is newly created,
in that case we want to delete the network only not workspace. So for this case we have to tag the network.
I have already checked for network tagging is supported .
// IBMPowerVSClusterSpec defines the desired state of IBMPowerVSCluster. | ||
type IBMPowerVSClusterSpec struct { | ||
|
||
// UserTags contains list of tags needs to be applied on resources |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
// UserTags contains list of tags needs to be applied on resources | |
// UserTags contains list of tags needs to be attached to resources |
Will the user provided tags be attached to all the cluster resources?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes User tags will be added to all the cluster resources
c7fec6b
to
14da794
Compare
Updated the flow diagram |
What this PR does / why we need it:
Proposal for adding the tags to PowerVS Cluster resources and performing delete of resources on the bases of tags
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
/area provider/ibmcloud
Release note: