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

docs(artifacts): add note about server access #13425

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

reilly3000
Copy link

Motivation

When using Workload Identity the calling Kubernetes service account assumes GKE workload identity if it is annotated to do so, but per current docs it isn't clear that there are at least two service accounts that will need to be able to call the bucket. I am raising this change to help others avoid finding 500 errors when trying to retrieve archived logs for Workflows.

Modifications

Added docs content to explain that argo-server needs Workload identity enabled for use with Archive Logs

Verification

n/a

Copy link
Contributor

@agilgur5 agilgur5 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This doesn't seem specific to archive logs, rather artifacts in general. Similarly, not about GKE, but any artifact retrieval: if you want to view them in the UI, the Server needs to be able to read them, yes

If there isn't a section about this already, this may make sense as its own separate section, either here or in the Server docs

@agilgur5 agilgur5 changed the title docs: Add note about GCP Workload Identity for archive logs docs(artifacts): add note about server access Aug 1, 2024
@agilgur5 agilgur5 added area/docs Incorrect, missing, or mistakes in docs area/artifacts S3/GCP/OSS/Git/HDFS etc area/server labels Aug 1, 2024
@agilgur5
Copy link
Contributor

agilgur5 commented Aug 1, 2024

The S3 IRSA section mentions the Server too. I would say to either follow that for now or make a new section about it properly. This page definitely needs a bit of a rewrite though (I started one many months ago actually, but the page is quite long so I never quite finished).

@agilgur5 agilgur5 added the problem/more information needed Not enough information has been provide to diagnose this issue. label Aug 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity and needs further changes. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the problem/stale This has not had a response in some time label Aug 29, 2024
@reilly3000 reilly3000 marked this pull request as draft August 30, 2024 16:53
@github-actions github-actions bot removed problem/stale This has not had a response in some time problem/more information needed Not enough information has been provide to diagnose this issue. labels Aug 31, 2024
@agilgur5 agilgur5 added the problem/more information needed Not enough information has been provide to diagnose this issue. label Sep 10, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity and needs further changes. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the problem/stale This has not had a response in some time label Sep 25, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has been closed due to inactivity and lack of changes. If you would like to still work on this PR, please address the review comments and re-open.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Oct 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/artifacts S3/GCP/OSS/Git/HDFS etc area/docs Incorrect, missing, or mistakes in docs area/server problem/more information needed Not enough information has been provide to diagnose this issue. problem/stale This has not had a response in some time
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants