Uploaded image for project: 'OpenShift Request For Enhancement'
  1. OpenShift Request For Enhancement
  2. RFE-7119

Quay Operator to provide Bucket Class select possibility

XMLWordPrintable

    • Icon: Feature Request Feature Request
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Icon: Normal Normal
    • None
    • None
    • Quay
    • None
    • Future Sustainability
    • None
    • False
    • Hide

      None

      Show
      None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None

      1. Adding functionality to let Quay Operato provide Bucket Class selection possibility.
      2. What is the nature and description of the request?
        Reason for the possibilty to select the Bucket Storage Class is that unless one wants to utilize MCG(NooBaa) as Bucket backend, one needs to set the Operator Component for Storage as unmanaged and configure the Bucket/credentials manually. From OCP and Operator POV, it's just a different Bucket Storage Class to be used.
      3. Why does the customer need this? (List the business requirements here)
        In particular for one Customer use-case of mine, they utilize a 60TB+ Bucket sized Quay deployment and moving the data to MCG implies a downtime which isn't acceptable in particular as the backend doesn't move if the Class selection is provided.
        The second use-case we have been informed was coming from the community havin a similar situation on the Bucket StorageClass type.
      4. List any affected packages or components.
        Quay Operator logic
        Quay QE verification of additional Bucket Storage Classes

              rhn-coreos-tunwu Tony Wu
              rhn-support-milang Michaela Lang
              None
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated:
                None
                None