onboard a client onto already created storageconsumer based on token #3075
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Leela Venkaiah G <[email protected]>
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: leelavg 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 |
Signed-off-by: Leela Venkaiah G <[email protected]>
| // get the consumer corresponding to this ticket | ||
| storageConsumerList := &ocsv1alpha1.StorageConsumerList{} | ||
| if err := s.client.List(ctx, storageConsumerList, client.InNamespace(s.namespace)); err != nil { | ||
| klog.Errorf("failed to get storageconsumers in the namespace: %v", err) | ||
| return nil, status.Errorf(codes.Internal, "failed to get storageconsumers. %v", err) | ||
| } else if len(storageConsumerList.Items) < 1 { | ||
| return nil, status.Errorf(codes.FailedPrecondition, "no storageconsumers exist in the namespace") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| consumerName := "" | ||
| for idx := range storageConsumerList.Items { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of fetching each consumer, getting the secret attached and comparing the onboarding ticket in the secret, why not add the consumer name to the onboarding ticket struct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we could do that after a small discussion as it implies the token will be applicable only to the specific storageconsumer.
| @@ -135,11 +139,50 @@ func (r *StorageConsumerReconciler) initReconciler(request reconcile.Request) { | |||
|
|
|||
| func (r *StorageConsumerReconciler) reconcilePhases() (reconcile.Result, error) { | |||
|
|
|||
| secret := &corev1.Secret{} | |||
| secret.Name = r.storageConsumer.Name | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we add an annotation to storageConsumer that points to the onboarding ticket secret for that conusmer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the intention was to have the same name for consumer & secret, didn't get your suggestion.
| err = fmt.Errorf("storageconsumers.ocs.openshift.io %s already exists", storageConsumer.Name) | ||
| return nil, status.Errorf(codes.AlreadyExists, "failed to onboard on storageConsumer resources. %v", err) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we are not creating the consumer anymore in this rpc, could we update the err message to be something more meaningful like "storageconsumer already has a client attached to it"?
storageconsumer controllers creates a secret for user to be mentioned in storageclient for onboarding onto that specific storageconsumer. Until the storageconsumer is enabled, deletion of secret is considered as rotation of token.
Onboarding adds the supplied ticket to the storageconsumer as annotation as the linking b/n the storageclient to storageconsumer.