delgadom
commented
4 years ago Got it. Yeah this seems like a great intermediate step as long as it doesn’t delete data. It seems like the filestore solution is a little farther off so this seems fine. Is this what’s deployed on test2?
From: Ian Bolliger notifications@github.com Reply-To: RhodiumGroup/helm-chart reply@reply.github.com Date: Sunday, December 1, 2019 at 1:06 PM To: RhodiumGroup/helm-chart helm-chart@noreply.github.com Cc: Michael Delgado mdelgado@rhg.com, Comment comment@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [RhodiumGroup/helm-chart] WIP: Pangeo updates (#7)
@bolliger32 commented on this pull request.
In jupyter-config.ymlhttps://github.com/RhodiumGroup/helm-chart/pull/7#discussion_r352372780:
storage:
capacity: 10Gi-
dynamic:
-
storageClass: pd-ssd
I think it won't do anything if there are already standard volumes existing. It will just affect new users and if we were to delete an old users volume. We could also just keep it standard and then at some point try migrating to the filestore instance?
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/RhodiumGroup/helm-chart/pull/7?email_source=notifications&email_token=AA4G7UA7KIJZ5WZPQMH65NDQWQRNZA5CNFSM4JO2OFNKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOCNPIVBQ#discussion_r352372780, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA4G7UC7KFO6J5WVCTIIYBDQWQRNZANCNFSM4JO2OFNA.
bolliger32
brews
I think we probably don't actually need our own helm chart (?) I think we can just get away with a config file that we use to configure the pangeo chart. This way, we can leave most of the keeping up with the rapid helm changes to them.
Note I only updated the jupyter_config.yml file and the test2.climate-kube.com creation script. The other creation scripts and the impactlab config file I haven't touched yet (nor the readme or .travis file, which we would probably only need for tests now).
It's a thought?