[ CC-32596 ] Add WAL failover custom path support for helm chart of cockroachdb operator deployments and handle the migration changes #557
Conversation
| # size: "25Gi" | ||
| # | ||
| # storageClassName defines the StorageClass for the PVC. | ||
| # If not set, the default provisioner will be chosen (gp2 on AWS, standard on GKE). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As per our discussion it is not true. When left empty in CockroachDB operator it doesn't pickup the default storage class. So we have to take an input from user if enabled.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@prafull01 In case of a fresh deployment - if the storageClassName is not provided , it picks up the default provisioner , only in case of migration , since the storageClassName would already be present , we not giving the className in the spec would cause problems. So populating the storageClassName is important during migration and not mandatory for fresh deployments.
shreyaskm623
force-pushed
the
walfailover-custom-path
branch
from
87758a0 to
2b13c23
Compare
- Fixed function signatures that were malformed during conflict resolution - Corrected indentation and bracket placement in helpers.go and helpers_test.go - Added missing import for k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/api/resource in test file - All tests now pass successfully - Both PCR and WAL failover functionality preserved and working 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
shreyaskm623
force-pushed
the
walfailover-custom-path
branch
from
2b13c23 to
c1ab842
Compare
| pullPolicy: IfNotPresent | ||
| # tag is the image tag. | ||
| tag: "6f62639e9fee99d99b0387a9dccda84daa1a489b592b008f2f354ec57eae09ac" | ||
| tag: "496a3d0b4b4a38637d97299aec52646c41eb32380c56b425376c8dd262c8b882" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your Image is not correct, that is why test is not working. Check the registry and repository as well
|
I'll close this PR in favour of : #565 I have addressed all the comments added above in the new PR , if there are any discussions we can continue in the newer one. |
3 participants
This PR adds support for -
CrdbWalFailoverSpec.Pathfield