Hi All,
Thank you for all the inputs on HDFS-9395. I have opened HDFS-10776 to discuss
the modifications needed for audit logging to be consistent and comprehensive.
We can move this discussion to the new JIRA.
Appreciate the support.
Regards,Kuhu Shukla
On Thursday, August 18, 2016 12:04 PM, Chris Nauroth
<[email protected]> wrote:
Andrew, thanks for adding your perspective on this.
What is a realistic strategy for us to evolve the HDFS audit log in a
backward-compatible way? If the API is essentially any form of ad-hoc
scripting, then for any proposed audit log format change, I can find a reason
to veto it on grounds of backward incompatibility.
- I can’t add a new field on the end, because that would break an awk script
that uses $NF expecting to find a specific field.
- I can’t prepend a new field, because that would break a "cut -f1" expecting
to find the timestamp.
- HDFS can’t add any new features, because someone might have written a
script that does "exit 1" if it finds an unexpected RPC in the "cmd=" field.
- Hadoop is not allowed to add full IPv6 support, because someone might have
written a script that looks at the "ip=" field and parses it by IPv4 syntax.
On the CLI, a potential solution for evolving the output is to preserve the old
format by default and only enable the new format if the user explicitly passes
a new argument. What should we do for the audit log? Configuration flags in
hdfs-site.xml? (That of course adds its own brand of complexity.)
I’m particularly interested to hear potential solutions from people like
Andrew and Allen who have been most vocal about the need for a stable format.
Without a solution, this unfortunately devolves into the format being frozen
within a major release line.
We could benefit from getting a patch on the compatibility doc that addresses
the HDFS audit log specifically.
--Chris Nauroth
On 8/18/16, 8:47 AM, "Andrew Purtell" <[email protected]> wrote:
An incompatible APIs change is developer unfriendly. An incompatible
behavioral change is operator unfriendly. Historically, one dimension of
incompatibility has had a lot more mindshare than the other. It's great that
this might be changing for the better.
Where I work when we move from one Hadoop 2.x minor to another we always
spend time updating our deployment plans, alerting, log scraping, and related
things due to changes. Some are debatable as if qualifying for the
'incompatible' designation. I think the audit logging change that triggered
this discussion is a good example of one that does. If you want to audit HDFS
actions those log emissions are your API. (Inotify doesn't offer access control
events.) One has to code regular expressions for parsing them and reverse
engineer under what circumstances an audit line is emitted so you can make
assumptions about what transpired. Change either and you might break someone's
automation for meeting industry or legal compliance obligations. Not a trivial
matter. If you don't operate Hadoop in production you might not realize the
implications of such a change. Glad to see Hadoop has community diversity to
recognize it in some cases.
> On Aug 18, 2016, at 6:57 AM, Junping Du <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think Allen's previous comments are very misleading.
> In my understanding, only incompatible API (RPC, CLIs, WebService, etc.)
shouldn't land on branch-2, but other incompatible behaviors (logs, audit-log,
daemon's restart, etc.) should get flexible for landing. Otherwise, how could
52 issues ( https://s.apache.org/xJk5) marked with incompatible-changes could
get landed on branch-2 after 2.2.0 release? Most of them are already released.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Junping
> ________________________________________
> From: Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 9:29 PM
> To: Allen Wittenauer
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.3 RC1
>
> I always look at CHANGES.txt entries for incompatible-changes and this
JIRA obviously wasn’t there.
>
> Anyways, this shouldn’t be in any of branch-2.* as committers there
clearly mentioned that this is an incompatible change.
>
> I am reverting the patch from branch-2* .
>
> Thanks
> +Vinod
>
>> On Aug 16, 2016, at 9:29 PM, Allen Wittenauer
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> -1
>>
>> HDFS-9395 is an incompatible change:
>>
>> a) Why is not marked as such in the changes file?
>> b) Why is an incompatible change in a micro release, much less a minor?
>> c) Where is the release note for this change?
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 12, 2016, at 9:45 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've created a release candidate RC1 for Apache Hadoop 2.7.3.
>>>
>>> As discussed before, this is the next maintenance release to follow up
2.7.2.
>>>
>>> The RC is available for validation at:
http://home.apache.org/~vinodkv/hadoop-2.7.3-RC1/
<http://home.apache.org/~vinodkv/hadoop-2.7.3-RC0/>
>>>
>>> The RC tag in git is: release-2.7.3-RC1
>>>
>>> The maven artifacts are available via repository.apache.org
<http://repository.apache.org/> at
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehadoop-1045/
<https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehadoop-1045/>
>>>
>>> The release-notes are inside the tar-balls at location
hadoop-common-project/hadoop-common/src/main/docs/releasenotes.html. I hosted
this at home.apache.org/~vinodkv/hadoop-2.7.3-RC1/releasenotes.html
<http://people.apache.org/~vinodkv/hadoop-2.7.2-RC1/releasenotes.html> for your
quick perusal.
>>>
>>> As you may have noted,
>>> - few issues with RC0 forced a RC1 [1]
>>> - a very long fix-cycle for the License & Notice issues (HADOOP-12893)
caused 2.7.3 (along with every other Hadoop release) to slip by quite a bit.
This release's related discussion thread is linked below: [2].
>>>
>>> Please try the release and vote; the vote will run for the usual 5 days.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vinod
>>>
>>> [1] [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.3 RC0:
https://www.mail-archive.com/hdfs-dev%40hadoop.apache.org/index.html#26106
<https://www.mail-archive.com/hdfs-dev%40hadoop.apache.org/index.html#26106>
>>> [2]: 2.7.3 release plan:
https://www.mail-archive.com/hdfs-dev%40hadoop.apache.org/msg24439.html
<http://markmail.org/thread/6yv2fyrs4jlepmmr>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
