Open camilamacedo86 opened 2 years ago
c/c @joelanford wdyt?
@camilamacedo86 What image is being used for <binary-image>
in these scenarios? I would expect that to be the base opm
image that does not include any catalog content.
@camilamacedo86 is there any additional information for this issue?
Hi @exdx,
We discuss this topic. The convoy is that the binary image field should not be used with existing/populated index images. It should just be the base opm image.
By default, that base image is the upstream quay.io/operator-framework/opm:latest image: https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-registry/blob/5566e4b6832a7fc08c12d3c79fc0a0b8c6a2e7aa/pkg/containertools/dockerfilegenerator.go#L11
See that:
So, it shows that what we could do here is just try to improve the help to clarifies it:
Adding bundles to an index using the
--binary image
option, new layers are added, increasing the size of the images exponentially. This only does not happen if the binary image does not have any layer with a database or an FBC catalog content. (this scenario is valid for FBC and SQL indexes formats).Note that the layer added will have the new bundle. But the previous layer with the database or FBC content is not removed:
Following the commands where this scenario can be faced.
For SQLite
For FBC
How to reproduce: