3 ms·

Disclaimer: k8s beginner here. As far as I understand, local storage provisioner is for the node local storage; the storage doesn't follow the workload to what

Disclaimer: k8s beginner here. As far as I understand, local storage provisioner is for the node local storage; the storage doesn't follow the workload to whatever node is the pod scheduled, but schedules the pod to the node containing the storage device. It doesn't allow for pods to access local storage outside the node. So for worker nodes using storage on the master node, isn't it better to use either iSCSI or NFS?

escardin 7y ago
This is exactly right. Local storage is conceptually the persistent volume equivalent to an emptydir volume mount. If you want to have a 'storage node' in a simple way, the NFS storage provider is the way to go. You install the nfs client libs on each node, setup an NFS share and configure and run the provisioner[1]. My experience with iSCSI is to stay the heck away from it. It is not what you want. iSCSI is really meant for people who already have iSCSI SANs and not people who have a disk they want to share. The more I learned about it, the more I learned that I should have picked something else for every use. It's not that it's bad, it's that it solves a much different problem than I expected given the networked nature of it. [1] https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/tree/master/nfs https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/tre... (I think this is the right one, been a while).
- zimmertr 7y ago
  NFS-Provisioner and NFS-Client have been around for a while. They're about to be promoted from Incubator actually.
  - yebyen 7y ago
    That is fantastic, I remember when they were new ideas without any implementation but just a few people trying some things on GitHub issues. https://engineering.bitnami.com/articles/scaling-wordpress-in-kubernetes.html https://engineering.bitnami.com/articles/scaling-wordpress-i... This article does the NFS approach justice I think, I was pleased to find it has been a working strategy for a while!

escardin 7y ago

This is exactly right. Local storage is conceptually the persistent volume equivalent to an emptydir volume mount. If you want to have a 'storage node' in a simple way, the NFS storage provider is the way to go. You install the nfs client libs on each node, setup an NFS share and configure and run the provisioner[1]. My experience with iSCSI is to stay the heck away from it. It is not what you want. iSCSI is really meant for people who already have iSCSI SANs and not people who have a disk they want to share. The more I learned about it, the more I learned that I should have picked something else for every use. It's not that it's bad, it's that it solves a much different problem than I expected given the networked nature of it. [1] https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/tree/master/nfs https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/external-storage/tre... (I think this is the right one, been a while).

zimmertr 7y ago
NFS-Provisioner and NFS-Client have been around for a while. They're about to be promoted from Incubator actually.
- yebyen 7y ago
  That is fantastic, I remember when they were new ideas without any implementation but just a few people trying some things on GitHub issues. https://engineering.bitnami.com/articles/scaling-wordpress-in-kubernetes.html https://engineering.bitnami.com/articles/scaling-wordpress-i... This article does the NFS approach justice I think, I was pleased to find it has been a working strategy for a while!