gcp-filestore-csi-driver VS aws-ebs-csi-driver

Hi Ofek,

I am a contributor who works on the Google Cloud Storage FUSE CSI Driver project. The project is partially inspired by your CSI implementation. Thank you so much for the contribution to the Kubernetes community. However, I would like to clarify a few things regarding your post.

The Cloud Storage FUSE CSI Driver project does not have “in large part copied code” from your implementation. The initial commit you referred to in the post was based on a fork of another open source project: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gcp-filestore-csi-driver. If you compare the Google Cloud Storage FUSE CSI Driver repo with the Google Cloud Filestore CSI Driver repo, you will notice the obvious similarities, in terms of the code structure, the Dockerfile, the usage of Kustomize, and the way the CSI is implemented. Moreover, the design of the Google Cloud Storage FUSE CSI Driver included a proxy server, and then evolved to a sidecar container mode, which are all significantly different from your implementation.

As for the Dockerfile annotations you pointed out in the initial commit, I did follow the pattern in your repo because I thought it was the standard way to declare the copyright. However, it didn't take me too long to realize that the Dockerfile annotations are not required, so I removed them.

Thank you again for your contribution to the open source community. I have included your project link on the readme page. I take the copyright very seriously, so please feel free to directly create issues or PRs on the Cloud Storage FUSE CSI Driver GitHub project page if I missed any other copyright information.

Any Kubernetes cluster requires persistent storage - whether organizations choose to begin with an on-premise Kubernetes cluster and migrate to the public cloud, or provision a Kubernetes cluster using a managed service in the cloud. Kubernetes supports multiple types of persistent storage – from object storage (such as Azure Blob storage or Google Cloud Storage), block storage (such as Amazon EBS, Azure Disk, or Google Persistent Disk), or file sharing storage (such as Amazon EFS, Azure Files or Google Cloud Filestore). The fact that each cloud provider has its implementation of persistent storage adds to the complexity of storage management, not to mention a scenario where an organization is provisioning Kubernetes clusters over several cloud providers. To succeed in managing Kubernetes clusters over a long period, knowing which storage type to use for each scenario, requires storage expertise.

The AWS EBS CSI Driver relies on IAM permissions to communicate with Amazon EBS for volume management on behalf of the user. The example policy can be used to define the required permissions. Additionally, AWS provides a managed policy at ARN arn:aws:iam::aws:policy/service-role/AmazonEBSCSIDriverPolicy

I looks like the driver's permissions to invoke the EBS APIs was revoked and/or changed. When you install the EBS CSI addon you can either inherit permissions from the worker node or you can choose an IRSA role (preferred). If you use IRSA, the service account that the EBS CSI driver uses should have an annotation that references the ARN of the IAM role you selected, e.g. eks.amazonaws.com/role-arn: arn:aws:iam::111122223333:role/my-role. You can see an example of the IAM policy the driver needs here, https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/aws-ebs-csi-driver/blob/fb6d456558fb291b13f855454c1525c7acaf7046/docs/example-iam-policy.json.

I'm know it's possible to write terraform code that exhibits that issue, but that's not the case in my experience. I'm using helm to deploy aws's ebs csi driver in the above setup. As you mentioned, if the eks cluster was destroyed before the helm provider attempted to use its API to destroy the helm deployment, it would cause problems. And I don't run into that issue. It's not luck of timing, either - I also have a CI process that deploys all of this, tests, and deletes it all that has succeeded hundreds of times.

Any Kubernetes cluster requires persistent storage - whether organizations choose to begin with an on-premise Kubernetes cluster and migrate to the public cloud, or provision a Kubernetes cluster using a managed service in the cloud. Kubernetes supports multiple types of persistent storage – from object storage (such as Azure Blob storage or Google Cloud Storage), block storage (such as Amazon EBS, Azure Disk, or Google Persistent Disk), or file sharing storage (such as Amazon EFS, Azure Files or Google Cloud Filestore). The fact that each cloud provider has its implementation of persistent storage adds to the complexity of storage management, not to mention a scenario where an organization is provisioning Kubernetes clusters over several cloud providers. To succeed in managing Kubernetes clusters over a long period, knowing which storage type to use for each scenario, requires storage expertise.

Lots of info in this issue: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/aws-ebs-csi-driver/issues/1163

aws-ebs-csi-driver

Hello, we are running an EKS cluster (1.20) with aws-ebs-csi-driver (1.4.0). After recreating our whole cluster we can observe that the EBS volumes from our PVCs still exist but the "mapping" to the PVCs is gone.

OP could probably just layer their own CSI driver on top of an existing one (a la aws-ebs-csi-driver), but there's still several problems: