I have a Kubernetes cron job in AWS EKS that requires a persistent volume, so this is roughly what I have:
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
name: pvc-{{$.Release.Name}}-tmp
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadWriteOnce
volumeMode: Filesystem
resources:
requests:
storage: 10Gi
Then it's mounted to a cronjob (the mount part is correct, as the following shows)
All are deployed with Helm, and a fresh deployment times out, because the PVC remains in the Pending state with the message waiting for the first consumer to be created before binding. If during the deployment I create a new job based on the cron job, the PVC is immediately bound and this and all subsequent deployment work like expected.
Is it possible to either make a PVC bind "eagerly", without a pod that requires it or, preferably, not to wait for it to get bound during the chart installation?
What is the storage class that you use? Storage class has volumeBindingMode attributes that controls how PV is dynamically created.
The volumeBindingMode could be Immediate and WaitForFirstConsumer mode.
For checking the storage class you can do kubectl get storageclass or kubectl describe storageclass. The default storage class will be used if not specified on the K8 PVC definition.
References:
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/storage-classes/#volume-binding-mode
I have k8tes cluster in which I am facing issues while mounting the existing volume to the pod in the new deployment. I have the existing deployments where I am mounting the same existing PV and PVCs. But facing issues only new deployment.
What could be the reason? How can I mount(NFS) volume to the new deployments because both PV and PVC statuses are bound and claimed respectively?
you can not ideally If your mount mode is set to ReadWriteOnce.
If you are planning to use the NFS and want to attach multiple PODs to a single mount you have to use the ReadWriteMany.
Example :
---
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
name: nfs-data
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadWriteMany
resources:
requests:
storage: 2Gi
storageClassName: nfs
A PersistentVolumeClaim (PVC) is a request for storage by a user. It
is similar to a Pod. Pods consume node resources and PVCs consume PV
resources. Pods can request specific levels of resources (CPU and
Memory). Claims can request specific size and access modes (e.g., they
can be mounted ReadWriteOnce, ReadOnlyMany or ReadWriteMany, see
AccessModes).
Acces mode : https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/persistent-volumes/#access-modes
GKE example : https://medium.com/platformer-blog/nfs-persistent-volumes-with-kubernetes-a-case-study-ce1ed6e2c266
let me put you in context. I got pod with a configuration that looks close to this:
spec:
nodeSets:
- name: default
count: 3
volumeClaimTemplates:
- metadata:
name: elasticsearch-data
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadWriteOnce
resources:
requests:
storage: 5Gi
storageClassName: repd-ssd-xfs
I also have my StorageClass
apiVersion: ...
kind: StorageClass
metadata:
name: repd-ssd-xfs
parameters:
type: pd-ssd
fsType: xfs
replication-type: regional-pd
zones: us-central1-a, us-central1-b, us-central1-f
reclaimPolicy: Retain
volumeBindingMode: Immediate
I delete the namespace of the pod and then apply again and I notice that the pvc that my pod was using change and bound to a new pvc, the last pvc used by the pod is in state released. My question is that Is there any way to specify to the pod to use my old pvc? The StorageClass policy is Retain but that means that I can still using pvc with status released?
You can explicitly specify the persistent volume claim name in the pod spec if it's a deployment or a standalone pod like the code below:
volumes:
- name: task-pv-storage
persistentVolumeClaim:
claimName: task-pv-claim
However, if it's a StatefulSet, it will automatically attach to the same PVC every time the pod restarts. Hope this helps.
In addition to the answer provided by #shashank tyagi.
Have a look at the documentation Persistent Volumes and at the section Retain you can find:
When the PersistentVolumeClaim is deleted, the PersistentVolume still
exists and the volume is considered “released”. But it is not yet
available for another claim because the previous claimant’s data
remains on the volume. An administrator can manually reclaim the
volume with the following steps.
Delete the PersistentVolume. The associated storage asset in external infrastructure (such as an AWS EBS, GCE PD, Azure Disk, or
Cinder volume) still exists after the PV is deleted.
Manually clean up the data on the associated storage asset accordingly.
Manually delete the associated storage asset, or if you want to reuse the same storage asset, create a new PersistentVolume with the
storage asset definition.
It could be helpful to check the documentation Persistent volumes with Persistent Disks and this example How to set ReclaimPolicy for PersistentVolumeClaim.
UPDATE Have a look at the article Persistent Volume Claim for StatefulSet.
I am very new to Linux, Docker and Kubernetes. I need to setup an on-premises POC to showcase BDC.
What I have installed.
1. Ubuntu 19.10
2. Kubernetes Cluster
3. Docker
4. NFS
5. Settings and prerequisites but obviously missing stuff.
This has been done with stitched together tutorials. I am stuck on "AZDATA BDC Create". Error below.
Scheduling error on POD PVC.
Some more information.
NFS information
Storage class info
More Info 20191220:
PV & PVcs bound NFS side
Dynamic Volume Provisioning alongside with a StorageClass allows the cluster to provision PersistentVolumes on demand. In order to make that work, the given storage provider must support provisioning - this allows the cluster to request the provisioning of a "new" PersistentVolume when an unsatisfied PersistentVolumeClaim pops up.
First make sure you have defined StorageClass properly. You have defined nfs-dynamic class but it is not defined as default storage class, that's why your claims cannot bound volumes to it. You have two options:
1. Execute command below:
$ kubectl patch storageclass <your-class-name> -p '{"metadata": {"annotations":{"storageclass.kubernetes.io/is-default-class":"true"}}}'
Another option is to define in pvc configuration file storageclass you have used:
Here is an example cofiguration of such file:
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
name: myclaim
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadWriteOnce
volumeMode: Filesystem
resources:
requests:
storage: 8Gi
storageClassName: slow
selector:
matchLabels:
release: "stable"
matchExpressions:
- {key: environment, operator: In, values: [dev]}'
Simple add line storageClassName: nfs-dynamic.
Then make sure you have followed steps from this instruction: nfs-kubernetes.
I created a PersistentVolume sourced from a Google Compute Engine persistent disk that I already formatted and provision with data. Kubernetes says the PersistentVolume is available.
kind: PersistentVolume
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: models-1-0-0
labels:
name: models-1-0-0
spec:
capacity:
storage: 200Gi
accessModes:
- ReadOnlyMany
gcePersistentDisk:
pdName: models-1-0-0
fsType: ext4
readOnly: true
I then created a PersistentVolumeClaim so that I could attach this volume to multiple pods across multiple nodes. However, kubernetes indefinitely says it is in a pending state.
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: models-1-0-0-claim
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadOnlyMany
resources:
requests:
storage: 200Gi
selector:
matchLabels:
name: models-1-0-0
Any insights? I feel there may be something wrong with the selector...
Is it even possible to preconfigure a persistent disk with data and have pods across multiple nodes all be able to read from it?
I quickly realized that PersistentVolumeClaim defaults the storageClassName field to standard when not specified. However, when creating a PersistentVolume, storageClassName does not have a default, so the selector doesn't find a match.
The following worked for me:
kind: PersistentVolume
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: models-1-0-0
labels:
name: models-1-0-0
spec:
capacity:
storage: 200Gi
storageClassName: standard
accessModes:
- ReadOnlyMany
gcePersistentDisk:
pdName: models-1-0-0
fsType: ext4
readOnly: true
---
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: models-1-0-0-claim
spec:
accessModes:
- ReadOnlyMany
resources:
requests:
storage: 200Gi
selector:
matchLabels:
name: models-1-0-0
With dynamic provisioning, you shouldn't have to create PVs and PVCs separately. In Kubernetes 1.6+, there are default provisioners for GKE and some other cloud environments, which should let you just create a PVC and have it automatically provision a PV and an underlying Persistent Disk for you.
For more on dynamic provisioning, see:
https://kubernetes.io/blog/2017/03/dynamic-provisioning-and-storage-classes-kubernetes/
Had the same issue but it was another reason that's why I am sharing it here to help community.
If you have deleted PersistentVolumeClaim and then re-create it again with the same definition, it will be Pending forever, why?
persistentVolumeReclaimPolicy is Retain by default in PersistentVolume. In case we have deleted PersistentVolumeClaim, the PersistentVolume still exists and the volume is considered released. But it is not yet available for another claim because the previous claimant's data remains on the volume.
so you need to manually reclaim the volume with the following steps:
Delete the PersistentVolume (associated underlying storage asset/resource like EBS, GCE PD, Azure Disk, ...etc will NOT be deleted, still exists)
(Optional) Manually clean up the data on the associated storage asset accordingly
(Optional) Manually delete the associated storage asset (EBS, GCE PD, Azure Disk, ...etc)
If you still need the same data, you may skip cleaning and deleting associated storage asset (step 2 and 3 above), so just simply re-create a new PersistentVolume with same storage asset definition then you should be good to create PersistentVolumeClaim again.
One last thing to mention, Retain is not the only option for persistentVolumeReclaimPolicy, below are some other options that you may need to use or try based on use-case scenarios:
Recycle: performs a basic scrub on the volume (e.g., rm -rf //*) - makes it available again for a new claim. Only NFS and HostPath support recycling.
Delete: Associated storage asset such as AWS EBS, GCE PD, Azure Disk, or OpenStack Cinder...etc volume is deleted
For more information, please check kubernetes documentation.
Still need more clarification or have any questions, please don't hesitate to leave a comment and I will be more than happy to clarify and assist.
If you're using Microk8s, you have to enable storage before you can start a PersistentVolumeClaim successfully.
Just do:
microk8s.enable storage
You'll need to delete your deployment and start again.
You may also need to manually delete the "pending" PersistentVolumeClaims because I found that uninstalling the Helm chart which created them didn't clear the PVCs out.
You can do this by first finding a list of names:
kubectl get pvc --all-namespaces
then deleting each name with:
kubectl delete pvc name1 name2 etc...
Once storage is enabled, reapplying your deployment should get things going.
I was facing the same problem, and realise that k8s actually does a just-in-time provision, i.e.
When a pvc is created, it stays in PENDING state, and no corresponding pv is created.
The pvc & pv (EBS volume) are created only after you have created a deployment which uses the pvc.
I am using EKS with kubernetes version 1.16 and the behaviour is controlled by StorageClass Volume Binding Mode.
I had same problem. My PersistentVolumeClaim yaml was originally as follows:
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
name: pvc
spec:
storageClassName: “”
accessModes:
– ReadWriteOnce
volumeName: pv
resources:
requests:
storage: 1Gi
and my pvc status was:
after remove volumeName :
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
name: pvc
spec:
storageClassName: “”
accessModes:
– ReadWriteOnce
resources:
requests:
storage: 1Gi
I've seen this behaviour in microk8s 1.14.1 when two PersistentVolumes have the same value for spec/hostPath/path, e.g.
kind: PersistentVolume
apiVersion: v1
metadata:
name: pv-name
labels:
type: local
app: app
spec:
storageClassName: standard
capacity:
storage: 5Gi
accessModes:
- ReadWriteOnce
hostPath:
path: "/mnt/k8s-app-data"
It seems that microk8s is event-based (which isn't necessary on a one-node cluster) and throws away information about any failing operations resulting in unnecessary horrible feedback for almost all failures.
I had this problem with helmchart of the apache airflow(stable), setting storageClass to azurefile helped. What you should do in such cases with the cloud providers? Just search for the storage classes that support the needed access mode. ReadWriteMany means that SIMULTANEOUSLY many processes will read and write to the storage. In this case(azure) it is azurefile.
path: /opt/airflow/logs
## configs for the logs PVC
##
persistence:
## if a persistent volume is mounted at `logs.path`
##
enabled: true
## the name of an existing PVC to use
##
existingClaim: ""
## sub-path under `logs.persistence.existingClaim` to use
##
subPath: ""
## the name of the StorageClass used by the PVC
##
## NOTE:
## - if set to "", then `PersistentVolumeClaim/spec.storageClassName` is omitted
## - if set to "-", then `PersistentVolumeClaim/spec.storageClassName` is set to ""
##
storageClass: "azurefile"
## the access mode of the PVC
##
## WARNING:
## - must be: `ReadWriteMany`
##
## NOTE:
## - different StorageClass support different access modes:
## https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/storage/persistent-volumes/#access-modes
##
accessMode: ReadWriteMany
## the size of PVC to request
##
size: 1Gi
When you want to bind manually a PVC to a PV with an existing disk, the storageClassName should not be specified... but... the cloud provider has set by default the "standard" StorageClass making it always entered whatever you try when patching the PVC/PV.
You can check your provider set it as default when doing kubectl get storageclass (it will be written "(default")).
To fix this the best is to get your existing StorageClass YAML and add this annotation:
annotations:
storageclass.kubernetes.io/is-default-class: "false"
Apply and good :)
Am using microk8s
Fixed the problem by running the commands below
systemctl start open-iscsi.service
(had open-iscsi installed earlier using apt install open-iscsi but had not started it)
Then enabled storage as follows
microk8s.enable storage
Then, deleted the Stateful Sets and the pending Persistence Volume Claims from Lens so I can start over.
Worked well after that.
I faced the same issue in which the PersistentVolumeClaim was in Pending Phase indefinitely, I tried providing the storageClassName as 'default' in PersistentVolume just like I did for PersistentVolumeClaim but it did not fix this issue.
I made one change in my persistentvolume.yml and moved the PersistentVolumeClaim config on top of the file and then PersistentVolume as the second config in the yml file. It has fixed that issue.
We need to make sure that PersistentVolumeClaim is created first and the PersistentVolume is created afterwards to resolve this 'Pending' phase issue.
I am posting this answer after testing it for a few times, hoping that it might help someone struggling with it.
Make sure your VM also has enough disk space.