Hi Yufei,

1: I do not really know. This is a question about a specific deployment
environment.

2: I'm not sure I understand your question. Two endpoints are necessary in
cases when the server's view of the network is different from the engine's
view.

Cheers,
Dmitri.



On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 5:59 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the explanation. Two questions:
> 1. Should the public endpoint used by engines still work with Polaris even
> if it co-locates with MinIO server?
> 2. Can we set Polaris endpoint directly to the internal address in that
> case? Another way to ask this question is that why do we need to keep both
> endpoints in the Polaris server?
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 11:06 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Yufei,
> >
> > The "how" in your question depends on the deployment environment, I
> guess.
> > There are a lot of variants.
> >
> > If you wonder whether such a situation is possible in practice, I
> > believe it is. An example would be self-hosting non-AWS S3 storage and
> > Polaris in a way that Polaris connections go through a certain internal
> > network, while connections from query engines running outside of that
> > deployment environment go through a different network. This is very
> > high-level, of course, since the deployment choices are largely driven by
> > specific users' needs. The proposed "endpointInternal" config entry
> merely
> > expands deployment options that users can choose from.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dmitri.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 1:07 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dimtri,
> > >
> > > That generally makes sense to me. For awareness, could you elaborate a
> > bit
> > > on how the Polaris server and query engines (like Spark, Trino, etc.)
> > might
> > > access the same object storage (e.g., MinIO) via different DNS
> endpoints?
> > >
> > > Yufei
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:36 AM Alexandre Dutra <adu...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Dmitri,
> > > >
> > > > I think your suggestion makes sense. We added something similar in
> > > > Nessie long ago, and it is definitely useful.
> > > >
> > > > I left some comments in the PR.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:12 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <
> di...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose to add an `endpointInternal` optional parameter to
> > > > > AwsStorageConfigInfo
> > > > > in PR [2213].
> > > > >
> > > > > The main idea is to support deployment edge cases where Polaris
> > Servers
> > > > may
> > > > > 'see' storage under a different DNS name than query engines. This
> use
> > > > case
> > > > > applies mostly to non-AWS S3 storage (e.g. MinIO).
> > > > >
> > > > > This change is backward-compatible with existing clients and
> deployed
> > > > > catalogs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > [2213] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2213
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Dmitri.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to