It would be nice if C# thin clients can upload C# compute functions to C# Ignite nodes, as can be done with the thick client.
-----Original Message----- From: Sergey Kozlov [mailto:skoz...@gridgain.com] Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 2:14 AM To: dev@ignite.apache.org Subject: Re: Timeline for support of compute functions by thin clients I'm ok if it does not break the idea to restrict execution for the signed code only. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello! > > > checksum of uploaded java code > > I argue not for Java code but for javascript/nashorn. Ruby or PHP guys > won't be happy about writing java, but they can easily do JS. > > (If we wanted Java, we could make it service grid-oriented. Which is > an interesting idea btw. We can frame local computations as service > methods, let thin clients invoke them. No code sending necessary in > this case.) > > Otherwise your suggestions look reasonable. The only thing I'll add, > let's make it a configuration field and not IGNITE_ define for usability. > > Regards, > > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > 2018-04-04 12:55 GMT+03:00 Sergey Kozlov <skoz...@gridgain.com>: > > > Hi > > > > We can introduce the rules to use compute tasks execution: > > 1. Disable by default that feature (enabling will require change a > > configuration property and restart cluster) 2. Disable by default > > code sending in the cluster (enabling will > require > > change a configuration property and restart cluster) 3. White list > > of allowed compute tasks: we can collect sha256 checksums for codes > > and allow to execute a task only if checksum of uploaded java code > > is listed in the white list. > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Dmitry, > > > > > > > > I just think that it's natural to have this functionality and > > > > that it > > > would > > > > drastically increase flexibility of thin client. Multiple > > > > requests > from > > > > users (one of them in this thread) seem to confirm this. At the > > > > same > > > time, > > > > I don't see much technical challenge here (like with near caches > > > > or continuous queries for example), and therefore don't see why > > > > we > should > > be > > > > against this features. > > > > > > > > Can you please elaborate on security risks? What exactly do you > > > > have > in > > > > mind? > > > > > > > > > > Val, my main concern was that users would use the thin client to > connect > > to > > > a remote cluster, hosted elsewhere, and could run some malicious code. > > But > > > you are right, it can probably be solved by other means, like a > firewall > > > for example. No objections on adding the compute API to thin > > > clients > from > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sergey Kozlov > > GridGain Systems > > www.gridgain.com > > > -- Sergey Kozlov GridGain Systems www.gridgain.com
