Hi, I am a happy user of Airbyte and recently got...
# feedback-and-requests
Hi, I am a happy user of Airbyte and recently got buy-in from management to use it as our main elt-tool. However, our security guys are not super happy about the Kubernetes version is in Beta - no special functionality is missing - it frankly seems to be the label/idea of being in Beta. So, my kind of dull question follows: is there an estimation/roadmap on when Airbyte Kubernetes will have a stable version? Thanks for an awesome product!
Hi Emil, great to hear from a happy user 🙂 We don't have a firm date as of now. My estimate would be within the next 6 months or so as we stabilize and roll out Airbyte Cloud (this runs on Airbyte K8s). Removing the beta label depends on our confidence of Airbyte K8's stability. This is something that takes time to determine, especially since we want to provide the highest quality software to our users. In the meantime, can we do anything to help convince your security department?
This was a very slow reply for my side. I have now succeeded in getting them to implement Airbyte on our K8 setup. There is however one issue that remain. We don’t have persistent storage in our K8 setup. (we do however have access to postgres and s3) So, my question is: https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/blob/master/kube/resources/server.yaml#L165 refer to volume-claim that mounts /configs to persistent storage. What is happening in configs? Can we use Airbyte on K8 without it? (maybe rebuild when needed / or git sync solution) Thanks for a great product!
Hi @Emil I think this will be a blocker. We are using persistent volume claims to share files between pods, I think that at the moment you can't bypass this.
Thanks for your answer @[DEPRECATED] Augustin Lafanechere . I am sad to hear. There is no possibility to use S3 for that instead?
You could try to mount persistent storage with NFS + S3
But this is something related to your cluster setup and administration decisions, a bit beyond the scope of the support we can offer.
Thank you for your answers. Unfortunately the infrastructure team did not like the solution.