Thanks, Derek. That answer my question.

So basically we don’t have the ability till OSE 3.6 to control storage by 
class/type using quotas. Basically we are exploring ways to control which 
projects should have access too which storage type/class. Like SSD is 
expensive, limit this type of storage to only few projects etc.

With combination of dynamic storage provision ( 3.4) , storage quotas ( 3.4) 
and storage class quota in future ( 3.6 ??)  would make sotrage more control 
for platform teams.

--
Srinivas Kotaru

From: Derek Carr <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:32 AM
To: Srinivas Naga Kotaru <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, dev 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Binding Persistent Volumes by Labels

The ability to quota storage by storage class has merged and will make 
Kubernetes 1.6 and would appear in OpenShift when it re-bases to that level.  
It lets you at a project/namespace level control how much storage you can 
consume by storage class (the assumption here is storage type is aligned with 
your usage of storage class).

The corresponding PR with a detailed scenario is here:
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/34554
I am working on a PR that I hope makes Kubernetes 1.6 to allow a resource to be 
marked as precious or limited by default.  This would allow you to say that a 
resource can not be consumed in a project unless its covered by a quota.

The corresponding PR with a sample configuration is here (its work-in-progress):
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/36765
Thanks,
Derek


On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Srinivas Naga Kotaru (skotaru) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Clayton

I saw the 3.4 release notes. Storage quota is good. I am not sure that satisfy 
my requirement of storage type allocation controlling (NFS, SSD etc) at project 
level.

Can you clarify?

--
Srinivas Kotaru

From: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:56 AM
To: Srinivas Naga Kotaru <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: dev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: Binding Persistent Volumes by Labels

In 1.4 quota of persistent volume claims per storage class will be available, 
but you have to define all of your classes up front in the quota.  A whitelist 
approach is coming later (where adding new storage classes would not require 
you to change everyone's quota for that new type to be zero)

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Srinivas Naga Kotaru (skotaru) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Can we control storage at project level, similar to node selector for POD’s 
scheduling?

Use case I have is, want to control different type of storage (NFS, SSD etc) at 
project creation time? like project A can have only NFS type storage, Project B 
can have SSD only, project C can have access to both projects.

--
Srinivas Kotaru

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev


_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to