nginx.conf appears to be a copy of clearml.conf.template and i’m trying to figure out what we can do to modify that prior to deployment.

i have it deployed successfully with istio. the only thing we had to do to get it to work was to modify the nginx.conf in the webserver pod to allow http 1.1

we have a direct connect to aws from our data center, so our vpcs are treated the same as a local network resource.

one last note on this. for my use case, the persistent volume route makes more sense, because we don’t need to dynamically create the storage. they are efs mounts that already exist, so the use of a storage class wouldn’t be helpful.

yeah we are planning on using helm. i just didn’t know if anyone had created charts for clearml with istio built into it. i’m working on creating a custom config with istio

he's still messing around though

the storage configuration appears to have changed quite a bit.

i’d have to pull from here
https://github.com/allegroai/clearml-server-k8s/blob/master/clearml-server-chart/templates/persistent-storage.yaml

if we host our persistent data/volumes on efs then there is not a mechanism to accommodate that in the 2.0 helm charts. i would essentially have to pull the template/values from the previous version, and fit it into the new version.

as far as kube node is concerned it is an nfs mount

i think this is still requiring some additional modification to the templates to make it work though

i guess i mean for anything using nodeport

AgitatedDove14 were you able to verify there was a fix released for the http 1.1 issue?

he goes more into the why of it a below that message.

looks like the same info that’s in https://github.com/allegroai/clearml-helm-charts

which is what i’ve been working off of. persistent volumes are completely gone.

right… it’s nginx that needs to be set. glad to hear it’s going to be updated though.

yeah all the hosts have the same nfs mounts. it’s what we use to store any kind of state that we need to for apps/services to allow it to run on any host without having to duplicate data.

storage classes and provisioners don’t really work because we aren’t trying to create anything new, which is why we use persistent volumes vs storage classes.

if i hit the api directly it returns fine

that thread is helpful for sure.

webserver

no… they function as nfs mounts and are configured as such in the current deployment.

we got it running. waiting for my coworker to give me the summary of what he did... he said it was something in the nginx config though

yes it did

which i was just looking at something like that before you responded, so i was going down the right path.

but there are a bunch of 405 errors in the log

yeah looking into it more it’s going to require a bit of extra setup whether i use the old storage templates or set it up with storage an external storage class and all that.

seems to only happen when going through the app

have you seen this happen before?

because you would need to add the storage class manifest