Bug 1769641 - StorageOSCluster example on StorageOS Operator description is not correct
Summary: StorageOSCluster example on StorageOS Operator description is not correct
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ISV Operators
Version: 4.3.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 4.3.0
Assignee: Bruno Andrade
QA Contact: Bruno Andrade
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-11-07 04:44 UTC by Bruno Andrade
Modified: 2020-01-23 11:11 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-01-23 11:11:28 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2020:0062 0 None None None 2020-01-23 11:11:49 UTC

Description Bruno Andrade 2019-11-07 04:44:36 UTC
Description of problem:
When a StorageOSCluster is being created, the suggested yaml looks like:

apiVersion: storageos.com/v1
kind: StorageOSCluster
metadata:
  name: example-storageos
  namespace: openshift-operators
spec:
  namespace: kube-system
  secretRefName: storageos-api
  secretRefNamespace: default
  csi:
    enable: true
    deploymentStrategy: deployment

According to official product documentation (https://docs.storageos.com/docs/platforms/openshift/install/4.1), it should be:

apiVersion: storageos.com/v1
 kind: StorageOSCluster
 metadata:
   name: storageos
   namespace: openshift-operators
 spec:
   secretRefName: "storageos-api" 
   secretRefNamespace: "openshift-operators"  
   namespace: openshift-operators
   csi:
     enable: true
     deploymentStrategy: deployment
   resources:
     requests:
     memory: "512Mi"
   k8sDistro: "openshift"

By using the default example, the CR is ignored and objects are not created.



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Storage OS 1.4.0 
OCP Version: 4.3.0-0.nightly-2019-11-02-092336

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Install it in the Web console, for example: "Operators"->"OperatorHub"->"Portworx"
2. Create CR of type StorageCluster

Actual results:
Wrong StorageOSCluster example is being shown on Operator description

Expected results:
The example of StorageOSCluster should be adapted for Openshift.

Comment 2 Simon Croome 2019-11-25 18:09:43 UTC
This should be fixed in https://github.com/storageos/cluster-operator/pull/197.  We'll release in 1.5.1 sometime this week.

Comment 3 Matt Dorn 2019-12-05 02:35:27 UTC
Thanks Simon!

We see the change adding `k8sDistro: openshift` field/value.

Can we also make the example CR look exactly like your tutorial section here?: https://docs.storageos.com/docs/platforms/openshift/install/4.1


Specifically ensuring the user sets secretRefNamespace within openshift-operators namespace (not default):


 apiVersion: storageos.com/v1
 kind: StorageOSCluster
 metadata:
   name: storageos
   namespace: openshift-operators
 spec:
   secretRefName: "storageos-api"
   secretRefNamespace: "openshift-operators"
   namespace: kube-system
   csi:
     enable: true
     deploymentStrategy: deployment
   resources:
     requests:
     memory: "512Mi"
   k8sDistro: "openshift"


I know this may seem pretty obvious to someone installing it...but just trying to make it as easy as possible for people to get StorageOS running!

Comment 4 Simon Croome 2019-12-05 17:45:57 UTC
Apologies Matt, I missed this.  Upstream PR: https://github.com/storageos/cluster-operator/pull/212.  We'll need to do a new release.

Comment 6 Bruno Andrade 2019-12-11 05:09:15 UTC
Tested at 1.5.1 Operator version and it looks good. Here is the StorageOSCluster description:

apiVersion: storageos.com/v1
kind: StorageOSCluster
metadata:
  name: example-storageos
  namespace: default
spec:
  namespace: kube-system
  secretRefName: storageos-api
  secretRefNamespace: default
  k8sDistro: openshift
  csi:
    enable: true
    deploymentStrategy: deployment


Marking as VERIFIED, thanks.

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2020-01-23 11:11:28 UTC
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-2020:0062


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