aws-fsx-csi-driver
aws-fsx-csi-driver copied to clipboard
Support deploymentType PERSISTENT_2
Is your feature request related to a problem?/Why is this needed PERSISTENT_2 deployment type has some advantages: better throughput, auto synchronize from LustreFSX -> S3. It's not supported in aws-fsx-csi-driver now.
deploymentType (Optional) - FSx for Lustre supports three deployment types, SCRATCH_1, SCRATCH_2 and PERSISTENT_1. Default: SCRATCH_1.
/feature
Describe the solution you'd like in detail
Support PERSISTENT_2
as an option in deploymentType
More information FSx Lustre released support for a new deployment type "Persistent_2" at re:Invent 2021. It provides long term storage with higher throughput tiers (125, 250, 500, 1000 MiB/s/TiB). See https://docs.aws.amazon.com/fsx/latest/LustreGuide/using-fsx-lustre.html for more details.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/stale
is applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stale
was applied,lifecycle/rotten
is applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue or PR as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle stale
- Mark this issue or PR as rotten with
/lifecycle rotten
- Close this issue or PR with
/close
- Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
/remove-lifecycle stale
FWIW, this seems to be purely a documentation issue. I was able to create a storage class (and a volume from it) with the following parameters:
deploymentType: "PERSISTENT_2"
perUnitStorageThroughput: "125"
storageType: "SSD"
FWIW, this seems to be purely a documentation issue. I was able to create a storage class (and a volume from it) with the following parameters:
deploymentType: "PERSISTENT_2" perUnitStorageThroughput: "125" storageType: "SSD"
If you not use S3 import it work)
/lifecycle frozen Yes, PERSISTENT_2 support is purely a documentation issue at this point. Freezing and will close once that documentation change has been made
I've tried to create PERSISTENT_2 with s3ImportPath
and there is an error
BadRequest: Linking a Persistent 2 file system to an S3 bucket using the LustreConfiguraton is not supported. Create a file system and then create a data repository association to link S3 buckets to the file system. For more details, visit https://docs.aws.amazon.com/fsx/latest/LustreGuide/create-dra-linked-data-repo.html
If s3ImportPath
is removed, then volume is created successfully.
Is there anyway to declare the s3 bucket association as PERSISTENT_1?
You can't create a data repo association w/ PERSISTENT_1 (P_1) file systems but you can create an S3 linked P_1 file system with autoImports, for example .
Reference: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/fsx/latest/LustreGuide/create-dra-linked-data-repo.html
Data repository associations, automatic export, and multiple data repositories are only supported on Persistent 2 file systems. If you're using a file system with an older FSx for Lustre deployment type, see Working with older deployment types.
One idea is changing API for PERSISTENT_2 to support multiple dataRepositories, for example:
kind: StorageClass
apiVersion: storage.k8s.io/v1
metadata:
name: fsx-sc
provisioner: fsx.csi.aws.com
parameters:
subnetId: <subnet-id>
securityGroupIds: <security-group-id>
deploymentType: PERSISTENT_2
dataRepositories:
- fileSystemPath: /ns1/path1
dataRepositoryPath: s3://s3-path-1
BatchImportMetaDataOnCreate: true
- fileSystemPath: /ns1/path2
dataRepositoryPath: s3://s3-path-2
BatchImportMetaDataOnCreate: true
Then call CreateDataRepositoryAssociation API in CreateFileSystem
(cc: @jacobwolfaws )
That actually a plan we have moving forward but not something we have resourced at the time being. When it is resourced, we will let you know
We've updated the documentation to show P2 support. @ittus feel free to create a new issue dedicated to s3ImportPath
/close
@jacobwolfaws: Closing this issue.
In response to this:
/close
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.
/remove-lifecycle frozen