Add support for persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy field #3354
Conversation
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| // PersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy builds the persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy for the given instance. | ||
| func PersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy(otelcol v1beta1.OpenTelemetryCollector) *appsv1.StatefulSetPersistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this function necessary? It doesn't hurt, but it looks like it only exists for the sake of the if otelcol.Spec.Mode != "statefulset" check, which seems superfluous given that the output struct can only be put in a StatefulSet to begin with.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've followed the way how the persistentVolumeClaim field is implemented.
So for this function, like:
https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-operator/blob/9623f552a7a6c116e5efb51543496b3bca76d7bf/internal/manifests/collector/volumeclaim.go#L26C1-L33C2
If you want, I can remove/change this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That one is also unnecessary in my opinion. There is no point at which the condition is ever false.
…difficulty and low added value
…y-operator into 3305-persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicy
Description:
Add support for
persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicyfield in opentelemetrycollector CR.The
persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicyworks only instatefulsetmode.persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicydescribes the lifecycle of persistent volume claims created fromvolumeClaimTemplates.Link to tracking Issue(s):
3305
Testing:
tests/e2e/statefulset-featurese2e test updated with the new field.Unit tests created for the conversion between api versions, statefulset mode check and for the correct propagation of the
persistentVolumeClaimRetentionPolicyfield.Documentation:
docs/api.mdupdated with the new field.