Missing values in extra/seaweedfs templates #2531

Activity

1. Chernosov Denis (dvc)

   added

   kind/bugCategorizes issue or PR as related to a bugCategorizes issue or PR as related to a bug

   on Apr 29, 2026
2. dosubot commented on Apr 29, 2026

   

   dosubotBot

   on Apr 29, 2026 – with DosuBot

   More actions

   Hi Chernosov Denis (@dvc)! I'm Dosu and I’m helping the cozystack team.

   Good catch! This is confirmed — the filer.replicas and s3.replicas values are defined in values.yaml [1] [2] and are referenced in the WorkloadMonitor resources [3] [4], but they are not interpolated into the HelmRelease spec.values section [5]. Other components like master, volume, and db correctly pass their replica counts [6] [7] [8], so filer and s3 are just missing the same pattern.

   The fix would be adding replicas: to the filer and s3 sections in the HelmRelease values:

   # filer section (~line 229)
   filer:
     replicas: {{ .Values.filer.replicas }}
     # ... existing config
   
   # s3 section (~line 238)
   s3:
     replicas: {{ .Values.s3.replicas }}
     # ... existing config

   This is also related to issue #2038 which tracks broader SeaweedFS value passthrough improvements [9].

   To reply, just mention @dosu.

   ---

   Docs are dead. Just use Dosu.

   
3. Aleksei Sviridkin (lexfrei)

   added

   area/extraIssues or PRs related to tenant-specific modules (packages/extra/)Issues or PRs related to tenant-specific modules (packages/extra/)

   area/storageIssues or PRs related to storage (linstor, seaweedfs, bucket, velero, harbor)Issues or PRs related to storage (linstor, seaweedfs, bucket, velero, harbor)

   triage/acceptedIndicates an issue is ready to be actively worked onIndicates an issue is ready to be actively worked on

   priority/important-soonMust be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next releaseMust be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release

   on Apr 29, 2026
4. lexfrei commented on Apr 29, 2026

   

   Aleksei Sviridkin (lexfrei)

   on Apr 29, 2026

   Contributor

   More actions

   Confirmed on main (6e045e69). The same .Values.*.replicas is referenced in two places, only one of which works:

   • HelmRelease spec.values.seaweedfs correctly passes replicas: for db (templates/seaweedfs.yaml:127), master (:140), and volume (:146) — but the filer block (:229-237) and s3 block (:238-253) omit it. So filer.replicas / s3.replicas from user values are silently dropped and the upstream chart defaults take over.
   • The WorkloadMonitor resources for filer (:284) and s3 (:378) do read .Values.filer.replicas / .Values.s3.replicas. As a second-order effect, when a user sets these values the monitor's expected replica count diverges from the actual deployment, which can trigger spurious alerts.

   Fix is straightforward — mirror the master/volume pattern and add replicas: {{ .Values.filer.replicas }} / replicas: {{ .Values.s3.replicas }} to the corresponding blocks in the HelmRelease values.

   Related (not a duplicate): #2038 tracks per-tenant SeaweedFS value passthrough at the Tenant chart level.
5. Andrei Kvapil (kvaps)

   self-assigned this

   on Apr 30, 2026
6. Andrei Kvapil (kvaps)

   closed this as completedin #2533on May 1, 2026
7. pull

   added a commit that references this issue on May 1, 2026

   fix(seaweedfs): pass filer.replicas and s3.replicas to HelmRelease (c…

   ...

   This issue will close once commit 5ef1500 is merged into the 'main' branch.

   5ef1500