-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 457
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fsgroup
is not applied correctly to already existing content in PVCs
#341
Comments
This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
still up |
This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
Still relevant |
This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
Never been so relevant. With some help, we could implement a fix |
Issue is still relevant. The |
This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
Hello 👋,
I'm using the
local-path-provisioner
as part ofk3d
, to test and validate our development and I discovered something strange with thelocal-path-provisioner
and its conformance to thefsGroup
parameterFirst, all the code used in this issue is available here
With EKS cluster
First, I deploy an app, this just writes on a PVC some files. The important settings are:
fsgroup: 4000
runAsGroup: 4000
runAs: 1000
So, files are owned by
1000
and group is4000
.Then, I redeploy the app with different SecurityContext settings:
fsgroup: 6000
runAsGroup: 6000
runAs: 1000
We can see,
1000
is still the owner, but6000
is now thegroup
owner, instead of4000
like before (following the k8s fsgroup spec).With K3d, presumably k3s
I repeat the same thing with k3d now, with the same settings. First with:
All is ok, with the same value as eks. But if I apply the same change, with following settings:
fsgroup: 6000
runAsGroup: 6000
runAs: 1000
Files are still owned by
4000
at group level, where it should be owned by6000
now.Conclusion
Is it a bug or an intended limitation of the
local-path-provisionner
?If yes, could we state it in the readme?
At implementation level, could we, for example, provide the
fsGroup
parameter to thesetup
script as an env variable to make thissetup
phase compatible?As user of it, can we do something to bypass this limitation?
Additional details:
If you need some extra details, don't hesitate to ask
/cc @tomdcc @mfredenhagen @pio-kol @gurbuzali @athkalia @skurtzemann @deepy @robmoore-i
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: