charts: upgrade is failing because of misinterpretation of storage-class change

[giubacc]

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

helm install s3gw -n s3gw --create-namespace s3gw/s3gw --set publicDomain=127.0.0.1.omg.howdoi.website --set ui.publicDomain=127.0.0.1.omg.howdoi.website --version 0.16.0 --wait

helm upgrade s3gw -n s3gw s3gw/s3gw --version 0.17.0 --wait

Expected behavior A clear and concise description of what you expected to
happen.

upgrade should not fail because of the following error:

Error: UPGRADE FAILED: cannot patch "s3gw-pvc" with kind PersistentVolumeClaim: PersistentVolumeClaim "s3gw-pvc" is invalid: spec: Forbidden: spec is immutable after creation except resources.requests for bound claims
  core.PersistentVolumeClaimSpec{
        ... // 2 identical fields
        Resources:        {Requests: {s"storage": {i: {...}, s: "10Gi", Format: "BinarySI"}}},
        VolumeName:       "pvc-ecb6dbe1-fee7-4f96-8a78-5667ae3c9109",
-       StorageClassName: &"local-path",
+       StorageClassName: nil,
        VolumeMode:       &"Filesystem",
        DataSource:       nil,
        DataSourceRef:    nil,
  }

the problem is that StorageClassName during the upgrade if not explicitly set with the value computed by k8s during the initial installation leads to the error above.

Not sure if this should be something we should point out explicitly in the documentation and explain the user how to retrieve the value of the storage-class and tell that this is a mandatory value to use when upgrading.

[giubacc]

@m-ildefons @jecluis I don't know if this is still something we want to address given that the s3gw charts will be discontinued (?)
Could this case be something the controller should care as well?

[jecluis]

I don't think the charts will be discontinued. The only thing being discontinued is the chart in the rancher marketplace.

Is there any other reason to close this issue?

[giubacc]

Is there any other reason to close this issue?

no ;)

So I guess it is only matter to decide the priority and if this should be a documentation issue.
I think we should/could mention this in the documentation when the s3gw will become GA and in the section dedicated to upgrades.

[jecluis]

marking as chart's documentation issue, to be reassessed later.