Dear Yehuda,

I have installed the patched version as you can see:

$ radosgw --version
ceph version 0.80.7-1-gbd43759 (bd43759f6e76fa827e2534fa4e61547779ee10a5)

$ ceph --version
ceph version 0.80.7-1-gbd43759 (bd43759f6e76fa827e2534fa4e61547779ee10a5)

$ sudo yum info ceph-radosgw
Installed Packages
Name        : ceph-radosgw
Arch        : x86_64
Version     : 0.80.7
Release     : 1.gbd43759.el6
Size        : 3.8 M
Repo        : installed
From repo   : ceph-source
Summary     : Rados REST gateway
URL         : http://ceph.com/
License     : GPL-2.0
Description : radosgw is an S3 HTTP REST gateway for the RADOS object store. It is : implemented as a FastCGI module using libfcgi, and can be used in
            : conjunction with any FastCGI capable web server.


Unfortunately the problem on the multipart upload with aws-sdk still remains the same!


Here is a part of the apache log:


"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=3&uploadId=2%2F9rEUmdFcuW66VJfeH3_jbqqUz0jKvrO HTTP/1.1" 403 78 "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"

"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=1&uploadId=2%2F9rEUmdFcuW66VJfeH3_jbqqUz0jKvrO HTTP/1.1" 403 78 "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"

"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=2&uploadId=2%2F9rEUmdFcuW66VJfeH3_jbqqUz0jKvrO HTTP/1.1" 403 78 "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"



Directly modification of the binary so that the "2%2F" be changed to "2-" results in success and here is the log:


"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=1&uploadId=2-R6bxv4TM2Brxn-w9aHOcbb8OSJ3-Vh2 HTTP/1.1" 200 - "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"

"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=2&uploadId=2-R6bxv4TM2Brxn-w9aHOcbb8OSJ3-Vh2 HTTP/1.1" 200 - "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"

"PUT /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?partNumber=4&uploadId=2-R6bxv4TM2Brxn-w9aHOcbb8OSJ3-Vh2 HTTP/1.1" 200 - "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"

"POST /clients-space/test/iip7.dmg?uploadId=2-R6bxv4TM2Brxn-w9aHOcbb8OSJ3-Vh2 HTTP/1.1" 200 302 "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.1.0 darwin/v0.10.33"




Can you think of something else??


Best regards,


George




OK! I will give it some time and will try again later!

Thanks a lot for your help!

Warmest regards,

George


The branch I pushed earlier was based off recent development branch. I
just pushed one based off firefly (wip-10271-firefly). It will
probably take a bit to build.

Yehuda

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Georgios Dimitrakakis
<gior...@acmac.uoc.gr> wrote:
Hi again!

I have installed and enabled the development branch repositories as
described here:


http://ceph.com/docs/master/install/get-packages/#add-ceph-development

and when I try to update the ceph-radosgw package I get the following:

Installed Packages
Name        : ceph-radosgw
Arch        : x86_64
Version     : 0.80.7
Release     : 0.el6
Size        : 3.8 M
Repo        : installed
From repo   : Ceph
Summary     : Rados REST gateway
URL         : http://ceph.com/
License     : GPL-2.0
Description : radosgw is an S3 HTTP REST gateway for the RADOS object store.
It is
: implemented as a FastCGI module using libfcgi, and can be used
in
            : conjunction with any FastCGI capable web server.

Available Packages
Name        : ceph-radosgw
Arch        : x86_64
Epoch       : 1
Version     : 0.80.5
Release     : 9.el6
Size        : 1.3 M
Repo        : epel
Summary     : Rados REST gateway
URL         : http://ceph.com/
License     : GPL-2.0
Description : radosgw is an S3 HTTP REST gateway for the RADOS object store.
It is
: implemented as a FastCGI module using libfcgi, and can be used
in
            : conjunction with any FastCGI capable web server.



Is this normal???

I am concerned because the installed version is 0.80.7 and the available
update package is 0.80.5

Have I missed something?

Regards,

George



Pushed a fix to wip-10271. Haven't tested it though, let me know if
you try it.

Thanks,
Yehuda

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Yehuda Sadeh <yeh...@redhat.com> wrote:

I don't think it has been fixed recently. I'm looking at it now, and
not sure why it hasn't triggered before in other areas.

Yehuda

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Georgios Dimitrakakis
<gior...@acmac.uoc.gr> wrote:

This issue seems very similar to these:

http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8202
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8702


Would it make any difference if I try to build CEPH from sources?

I mean is someone aware of it been fixed on any of the recent commits
and
probably hasn't passed yet to the repositories?

Regards,

George





On Mon, 08 Dec 2014 19:47:59 +0200, Georgios Dimitrakakis wrote:


I 've just created issues #10271

Best,

George

On Fri, 5 Dec 2014 09:30:45 -0800, Yehuda Sadeh wrote:


It looks like a bug. Can you open an issue on tracker.ceph.com,
describing what you see?

Thanks,
Yehuda

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Georgios Dimitrakakis
<gior...@acmac.uoc.gr> wrote:


It would be nice to see where and how "uploadId"

is being calculated...


Thanks,


George



For example if I try to perform the same multipart upload at an
older
version ceph version 0.72.2
(a913ded2ff138aefb8cb84d347d72164099cfd60)


I can see the upload ID in the apache log as:

"PUT




/test/XXXX.dat?partNumber=25&uploadId=I3yihBFZmHx9CCqtcDjr8d-RhgfX8NW
HTTP/1.1" 200 - "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.0.29 linux/v0.10.33"

but when I try the same at ceph version 0.80.7
(6c0127fcb58008793d3c8b62d925bc91963672a3)

I get the following:

"PUT






/test/XXXX.dat?partNumber=12&uploadId=2%2Ff9UgnHhdK0VCnMlpT-XA8ttia1HjK36
HTTP/1.1" 403 78 "-" "aws-sdk-nodejs/2.0.29 linux/v0.10.33"


and my guess is that the "%2F" at the latter is the one that is
causing the problem and hence the 403 error.



What do you think???


Best,

George



Hi all!

I am using AWS SDK JS v.2.0.29 to perform a multipart upload into
Radosgw with ceph version 0.80.7
(6c0127fcb58008793d3c8b62d925bc91963672a3) and I am getting a 403
error.


I believe that the id which is send to all requests and has been urlencoded by the aws-sdk-js doesn't match with the one in rados
because it's not urlencoded.

Is that the case? Can you confirm it?

Is there something I can do?


Regards,

George

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com




_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com



_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com



_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com





_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to