-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/74450/#review225553
-----------------------------------------------------------


Ship it!




Ship It!

- Dineshkumar Yadav


On May 23, 2023, 6:34 a.m., Pradeep Agrawal wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/74450/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 23, 2023, 6:34 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for ranger, bhavik patel, Abhay Kulkarni, Madhan Neethiraj, 
> Nikhil P, Pradeep Agrawal, Ramesh Mani, Selvamohan Neethiraj, Sailaja 
> Polavarapu, and Velmurugan Periasamy.
> 
> 
> Bugs: RANGER-4242
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-4242
> 
> 
> Repository: ranger
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> **Problem Statement:** Ranger upgrade may fail during the execution of 
> PatchPreSql_057_ForUpdateToUniqueGUID_J10052 and 
> PatchPreSql_057_ForUpdateToUniqueGUID_J10052
> 
> **Proposed Solution:** If there are too many policies to port to ranger as 
> per new schema then it shall make lot of unnecessary request to fetch the 
> policy object again and again. This can be reduced by using the same dao 
> object received for policy as policy_text contain the RangerPolicy snapshot 
> in json format.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchForSolrSvcDefAndPoliciesUpdate_J10055.java
>  f5f9f8956 
>   
> security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchPreSql_057_ForUpdateToUniqueGUID_J10052.java
>  e6ae57fc8 
>   
> security-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/patch/PatchPreSql_058_ForUpdateToUniqueResoureceSignature_J10053.java
>  fb7e5fd40 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/74450/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested the change by upgrading the ranger from 2.2 to master branch with this 
> patch and upgrade executed successfully.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Pradeep Agrawal
> 
>

Reply via email to