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

Harbor PersistentVolumeClaims names changed in 2.3.0 #987

Closed
kengibous opened this issue Jun 24, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

Harbor PersistentVolumeClaims names changed in 2.3.0 #987

kengibous opened this issue Jun 24, 2021 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@kengibous
Copy link

It appears the names used for the persistentvolumeclaims changed when I upgraded from Harbor v2.2.2 (Chart 1.6.2) to Harbor v2.3.0 (Chart 1.7.0)

The names of the PVCs in v2.2.2 where

data-harbor-harbor-redis-0
data-harbor-harbor-trivy-0
database-data-harbor-harbor-database-0
harbor-harbor-chartmuseum
harbor-harbor-jobservice 
harbor-harbor-registry

Upgrading to v2.3.0 created new PVCs with names

data-harbor-redis-0
data-harbor-trivy-0
database-data-harbor-database-0
harbor-chartmuseum
harbor-jobservice 
harbor-registry

This is problematic because all the existing data is in the previously named pvcs - could this be related to the changes in

db7b7c1#diff-87d68c754766af8e2e930e653be7e4b75fa0c8bdb187cb1bec293f265d9159ff

Looks like changes to the harbor.fullname might have changed the naming convention for the pvc names

@yannickb85
Copy link

We had the same issue as @kengibous when upgrading from v2.2.2 to v2.3.0 using the 1.7.0 helm chart.

The name of the 3 PVCs attached to the redis, trivy and database components changed. During the upgrade, PVCs with the new names were created (empty).

We had to manually move the data from the old PVCs to the newly created ones to restore our redis/trivy/database data correctly.

Note that we were not using the "persistence -> persistentVolumeClaim -> database/redis/trivy -> existingClaim" properties in our values.yaml overrides. I guess that could've solved our issue as well..

@titou10titou10
Copy link

In fact, the name of all componenIs changed, so the change inStatefulSetPVC names
It seems it is possible to override the base name for components with value"nameOverride"but this value is nowhere documented and it is not present in"values.yaml", only in "_helpers.tpl"
It shoud be invalues.yaml", documented and in changelog

@ninjadq
Copy link
Member

ninjadq commented Jul 8, 2021

@ywk253100 should we need to mention this in the release note?

@ywk253100
Copy link
Collaborator

ywk253100 commented Jul 19, 2021

Just mentioned by @kengibous , the issue is caused by the naming convention change introduced by db7b7c1#diff-87d68c754766af8e2e930e653be7e4b75fa0c8bdb187cb1bec293f265d9159ff in Harbor chart 1.7.0

If installing the Harbor chart(1.6-) with a release name that contains harbor, e.g. my-harbor, and trying to upgrade it to 1.7+ you will get the same issue here.

The workaround is performing the upgrade with the setting fullnameOverride with value release_name-harbor, e.g. my-harbor-harbor, in values.yaml or --set option

ywk253100 added a commit to ywk253100/harbor-helm that referenced this issue Jul 19, 2021
Update the upgrade documentation to provide the workaroud for issue goharbor#987

Signed-off-by: Wenkai Yin(尹文开) <yinw@vmware.com>
ywk253100 added a commit to ywk253100/harbor-helm that referenced this issue Jul 19, 2021
Update the upgrade documentation to provide the workaroud for issue goharbor#987

Signed-off-by: Wenkai Yin(尹文开) <yinw@vmware.com>
@ywk253100
Copy link
Collaborator

Updated the release notes and upgrade documentation, closing this issue

@SamDecrock
Copy link

SamDecrock commented May 5, 2022

Can this be added to the to the Helm upgrade page: https://goharbor.io/docs/2.0.0/administration/upgrade/helm-upgrade/ ?
Ps: same issue happens with the ingress rule.

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

No branches or pull requests

6 participants