Split mcg_bucket into Object Bucket Claim and Object Bucket

[fbalak]

https://github.com/red-hat-storage/ocs-ci/blob/master/ocs_ci/ocs/resources/mcg_bucket.py implements classes MCGBucket, S3Bucket, OCBucket and CLIBucket. These classes are accessing obc resources but their names indicate that they represent ob. There should be representations for Bucket and Bucket claim. Bucket should contain reference to its bucket claim object.

[fbalak]

@MeridianExplorer Do you think that this makes sense?

[Neon-White]

Hi @fbalak - thanks for bringing this up!

I believe we actually have a mixed bag over here - OCBucket and CLIBucket create an OBC, that in turn creates an OB. The objects they represent are indeed claims, and not the buckets themselves. However, S3Bucket actually represents an object bucket, since S3 is a different control plane that does not use bucket claims.

I believe a possible direction will be to change the CLI and OC buckets to point at their actual object buckets (using S3), and they'll also contain their respective claims, in a different attribute.

What do you think?

[fbalak]

@MeridianExplorer That would be a possible solution but I think that it would be better to have distinct representation for buckets and claims. Do you think it would make sense to have one ObjectBucketClaim class with some method parameter that takes values OC or CLI?

Also, we can have ObjectBucket objects with link to ObjectBucketClaim object that was used to create them and work with them separately so there will be no confusion for user about what resource is currently used.

[Neon-White]

@fbalak - OBC was implemented in March -

https://github.com/red-hat-storage/ocs-ci/blob/bdb4fce13b5582df09afef9028665554151fb307/ocs_ci/ocs/resources/bucket_policy.py#L14-L17

Considering we do not interact with OBs directly - I personally think it's sufficient. What do you think?

[fbalak]

If we don't interact with OBs directly then it's probably ok to close it but we should make sure that correct terminology is used everywhere (claims are not referenced as buckets).

[Neon-White]

I agree with your point that the terminology is problematic - but refactoring all our code to treat OBCs as OBCs instead of buckets will be a pretty heavy undertaking right now. Maybe we can add some text regarding those terminologies somewhere in OCSCI?

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically closed due to inactivity. Please re-open if this still requires investigation.