Bug 1372430 – [RFE] Match strorage-class labels with pv-selectors

Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.

Bug 1372430 - [RFE] Match strorage-class labels with pv-selectors [NEEDINFO]

Summary:	[RFE] Match strorage-class labels with pv-selectors

Status:	CLOSED ERRATA

Aliases:	None

Product:	OpenShift Container Platform
Classification:	Red Hat
Component:	RFE (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	3.4.0
Hardware:	Unspecified Unspecified

Priority	unspecified Severity unspecified
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Paul Morie
QA Contact:	Johnny Liu
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2016-09-01 13:00 EDT by Brennan Vincello
Modified:	2017-03-08 13 EST (History)
CC List:	7 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-01-18 07:53:13 EST
Type:	Bug
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Flags:	erich: needinfo? (bvincell)

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

External Trackers
Tracker	ID	Priority	Status	Summary	Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata	RHBA-2017:0066	normal	SHIPPED_LIVE	Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 3.4 RPM Release Advisory	2017-01-18 12:23:26 EST

Groups: None (edit)

Description Brennan Vincello 2016-09-01 13:00:15 EDT

Ticket created to track: https://trello.com/c/LMc4eVgW/105-5-storage-classes-match-labels-with-the-selectors-ops-rfe-qos

Mirrored: As a user I want the storage-class labels to match on the pv-selector so I can explicitly ask for a storage with certain properties (speed, ...), assuming that the system admin labeled the Persistent Volumes appropriately.

Comment 1 Eric Paris 2016-09-01 14:21:34 EDT

I do not understand this BZ. The card in question is done, complete, and closed.

The phrase 'storage-class labels' does not make sense to me. Well, the StorageClass object does have labels, but they are not relevant to any form of PVC->PV binding.

For a PVC to bind to a PV the size, access mode, StorageClass, and LabelSelector between the PVC and PV must ALL be satisfied.

Is this BZ just intended to be a placeholder until the LabelSelector is in OCP (3.3?) or when StorageClasses are in OCP (3.4?)

Comment 3 errata-xmlrpc 2017-01-18 07:53:13 EST

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:0066

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.