[docs] Update SAM verbiage in project volume doc #798
Conversation
|
/cc @openshift/openshift-team-windows-containers @codyhoag |
openshift-ci
bot
requested review from
a team,
codyhoag,
mansikulkarni96 and
sebsoto
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/approve cancel |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
approved
docs/projected-volume.md
Outdated
| containers are designed to run the user mode portion of the OS in isolation from the host, hence the maintenance of a | ||
| virtual SAM database. As a result, the kublet running on the host does not have the ability to dynamically configure | ||
| host file ownership for virtualized container accounts. It is recommended that if files on the host machine are to be | ||
| shared with the container then they should be placed into their own volume mount outside of `C:\`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this implying that there should be a separate letter drive for each set of host files needed to be shared with different containers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like it. This is coming directly from Microsoft.
codyhoag
left a comment
codyhoag
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a couple wording nits from my side; LGTM otherwise
| user and group accounts in a database file called Security Account Manager (SAM). Each container maintains its own | ||
| instance of the SAM database, to which the host has no visibility into while the container is running. Windows |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| user and group accounts in a database file called Security Account Manager (SAM). Each container maintains its own | |
| instance of the SAM database, to which the host has no visibility into while the container is running. Windows | |
| user and group accounts in a database file called Security Account Manager (SAM). Each container maintains its own | |
| instance of the SAM database; the host machine has no visibility into the SAM database while the container is running. Windows |
This sentence sounded awkward to me. Does this suggestion mean the same thing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This could imply the SAM database on the host. So it would be safer to leave this as is.
|
/lgtm |
aravindhp
force-pushed
the
projected-volume-update
branch
from
e4eba77 to
ee54a26
Compare
|
LGTM |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: sebsoto The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/lgtm |
6 participants
...from kubernetes/website#30366