ivandika3 commented on code in PR #8315:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/8315#discussion_r2055203551
##########
hadoop-ozone/s3gateway/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/ozone/s3/endpoint/RootEndpoint.java:
##########
@@ -61,6 +62,9 @@ public Response get()
throw e;
}
+ OzoneVolume volume = getVolume();
+ response.setOwner(new S3Owner(volume.getName(), volume.getName()));
Review Comment:
I think we can follow the the current convention of setting both arguments
to the volume owner name similar to the other S3Owner usage.
From what I see, the unique account ID is coupled to the specific IAM
implementation that will generate a unique ID for each user account. However,
since Hadoop authentication (UserGroupInformation) do not have this concept of
unique account ID, we cannot be fully compatible with this format. I'm not sure
about Ranger though.
Additionally, we need to write tests for this since we don't know whether S3
client will actually enforce this format. If it is, then we have to adhere to
it. In that case, maybe we can write a simple hash function to generate this
64-character encoded unique user name, but this won't be unique for user with
the same user name (which should be fine).
However, you can see at my overall comment that our ListBuckets
implementation is not really compatible with the S3 API specification in the
first place.
Edit: We can follow @jojochuang suggestion to follower other system's logic.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@ozone.apache.org
