Add docs for CustomResource validation #5290
Conversation
|
@nikhita: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: ensonic. Note that only kubernetes members can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
cncf-cla: yes
|
Deploy preview ready! Built with commit 3fb9908 https://deploy-preview-5290--kubernetes-io-vnext-staging.netlify.com |
|
/cc @enisoc |
| --feature-gates=CustomResourceValidation=true | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| In this example, the CustomResourceDefinition applies the following validations on |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this example -> In the following example
| kubectl create -f resourcedefinition.yaml | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| If a custom object of kind `CronTab` with fields having invalid values is created, the object will be rejected. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-> A request to create a custom object of kind CronTab will be rejected if there are invalid values in its fields.
The points are: 1) the thing that is rejected is the request, not the object; 2) a rejected request will have no object created.
| metadata: | ||
| name: my-new-cron-object | ||
| spec: | ||
| cronSpec: "* * * * /5" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This line should be changed as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This line represents an invalid value i.e * * * * /5 is invalid but * * * * */5 is valid.
However, I can see that it can cause confusion so changed this to something more explicit. (* * * *)
| spec.replicas in body should be less than or equal to 10 | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| If the fields contain valid values, the custom object is accepted. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the object creation request is accepted.
|
/lgtm @nikhita Did you end up having any differences in supported fields/values versus the full OpenAPIV3 Schema? If so it would be good to list them here. |
Good point. We should document that (additionalProperties comes to mind, probably some more). |
|
Updated. PTAL, thanks. |
| Validation of custom objects is possible via [OpenAPI v3 schema](https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/master/versions/3.0.0.md#schemaObject). | ||
| Additionally, the following restrictions are applied to the schema: | ||
|
|
||
| - The fields `default`, `nullable`, `discriminator`, `readOnly`, `writeOnly`, `xml` and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
then we should better write "cannot be set".
add info about supported fields
|
/lgtm |
|
@chenopis can you take a look from the docs perspective? |
This prepares us for the associated alpha feature in k8s 1.8. See kubernetes/website#5290 for docs.
This prepares us for the associated alpha feature in k8s 1.8. See kubernetes/website#5290 for docs.
Add docs for CustomResource validation. Ref: kubernetes/kubernetes#47263, kubernetes/community#708.
/cc @sttts @deads2k @enisoc
Preview links:
This change is