Skip to content

K8SPS-421: Add keyring vault support #938

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

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

K8SPS-421: Add keyring vault support #938

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

egegunes
Copy link
Contributor

@egegunes egegunes commented Jun 10, 2025

K8SPS-421 Powered by Pull Request Badge

CHANGE DESCRIPTION

This PR adds data-at-rest-encryption support using Vault keyring plugin.

To enable encryption, users need to provide the keyring configuration in a secret (spec.mysql.vaultSecretName). Example secret can be found in deploy/vault-secret.yaml.

Two new e2e-tests are added to cover this feature:

  1. gr-data-at-rest-encryption
  2. async-data-at-rest-encryption

CHECKLIST

Jira

  • Is the Jira ticket created and referenced properly?
  • Does the Jira ticket have the proper statuses for documentation (Needs Doc) and QA (Needs QA)?
  • Does the Jira ticket link to the proper milestone (Fix Version field)?

Tests

  • Is an E2E test/test case added for the new feature/change?
  • Are unit tests added where appropriate?

Config/Logging/Testability

  • Are all needed new/changed options added to default YAML files?
  • Are all needed new/changed options added to the Helm Chart?
  • Did we add proper logging messages for operator actions?
  • Did we ensure compatibility with the previous version or cluster upgrade process?
  • Does the change support oldest and newest supported PS version?
  • Does the change support oldest and newest supported Kubernetes version?

@egegunes egegunes added this to the v0.11.0 milestone Jun 10, 2025
@pull-request-size pull-request-size bot added the size/XXL 1000+ lines label Jun 10, 2025
@egegunes egegunes force-pushed the K8SPS-421 branch 2 times, most recently from 79e5d50 to 97a85e2 Compare June 12, 2025 07:05
gkech
gkech previously approved these changes Jun 16, 2025
),
SecurityContext: spec.PodSecurityContext,
SecurityContext: spec.PodSecurityContext,
Volumes: statefulSetVolumes(cr),
Copy link
Contributor

@gkech gkech Jun 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have some more prs that are doing almost the same for this release, so we will have conflicts here for sure.

@nmarukovich nmarukovich self-requested a review June 18, 2025 07:59
},
}

if cr.CompareVersion("0.11.0") >= 0 {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Given that the operator has not been released as GA yet, I think we can skip this check, since we don't do anything similar elsewhere in the codebase at this stage, WDYT?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

no, we decided that we should do version checks starting from this release

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't recall the decision, but given that we don't have a related e2e test to ensure that potential changes do not break this consistency, I think we should wait for a test to exist before we start applying compare versions. cc @hors

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
size/XXL 1000+ lines
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants