Skip to content
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

Add securityContext.supplementalGroups to deployment #659

Closed
pegatim opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

Add securityContext.supplementalGroups to deployment #659

pegatim opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@pegatim
Copy link

pegatim commented Oct 26, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Client's OpenShift environment requires multiple NFS mounts in deployment, where it needs to support multiple gids from these volumes. Altering these gids isn't an option for these exports. So, per OpenShift's recommendation securityContext.supplementalGroups was implemented in the client's environment to support their use case.

Reference:
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.13/storage/persistent_storage/persistent-storage-nfs.html#storage-persistent-storage-nfs-group-ids_persistent-storage-nfs

Describe the solution you'd like

Be able to implement securityContext.supplementalGroups feature via values file.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Request admin to modify NFS export, which was not an option.

Additional context
From research, securityContext.supplementalGroups is supported from v1.23-v.1.28.

Reference:
https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/v1.28/

Feel free to hit me up if clarification is necessary.

@pegatim pegatim added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 26, 2023
@micgoe
Copy link

micgoe commented Nov 7, 2023

A feature we also need for the plugin search node.
#635

@pegatim
Copy link
Author

pegatim commented Dec 6, 2023

@micgoe, regarding search node enhancement, with Search and Reporting Service available it may be a good idea to separate the enhancement request. Ref. #635, Kustomize is a good way to go for sure though.

@kishorv10 kishorv10 linked a pull request Apr 23, 2024 that will close this issue
@kishorv10
Copy link
Contributor

US-570518 (internal)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants