jojochuang commented on code in PR #488:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone-site/pull/488#discussion_r3574376780


##########
blog/2026-06-27-ozone-s3-compatibility/index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+---
+title: "Making Apache Ozone’s S3 Compatibility Visible"
+date: 2026-06-27
+authors: ["peterxcli"]
+tags: [Ozone, S3, compatibility]
+---
+
+<!-- cspell:ignore peterxcli Xiangpeng ish laggy Zstd overclaim amz -->
+
+Recently I created 
[https://ozone.s3.peterxcli.dev/](https://ozone.s3.peterxcli.dev/), an 
automated update dashboard for Apache Ozone S3 compatibility. It runs Ozone 
against real S3 compatibility suites, publishes the result every day, and lets 
you search test cases, inspect failures, read source snippets, open logs, and 
check whether your PR really helps the compatibility story. It is fully open 
source at 
[https://github.com/peterxcli/ozone-s3-compatibility](https://github.com/peterxcli/ozone-s3-compatibility).
+
+<!-- truncate -->
+
+TL;DR:
+
+- This really helped me get promoted as a PMC member of the Apache Ozone 
project.
+- Overall, **7% (50/711)** compatibility improvement at the time that this 
article was written.
+- Parquet \+ search-index optimization made the Pages data **11.8x smaller**, 
yearly git growth **12x slower**, and search data **14x smaller**.
+- It runs Apache Ozone against 
[`ceph/s3-tests`](https://github.com/ceph/s3-tests) and 
[`minio/mint`](https://github.com/minio/mint), then publishes a GitHub Pages 
report.
+- It turns compatibility from “a few epic tickets and some memory in people’s 
heads” into a searchable, linkable, daily signal.
+- For users, it answers “does Ozone support this S3 behavior today?” For 
developers, it answers “which exact test is failing, why, and did my PR move 
it?”
+
+## Why did I create it?
+
+Before this dashboard was introduced, Apache Ozone already tried really hard 
to track the compatibility gap with a few epic issues, for example: [Ozone S3 
gateway Phase 4](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-1186), [Ozone S3 
gateway (phase III)](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-12716), and [S3 
API compatibility improvements and 
fixes](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-8423).
+
+But I believe if you really click into the above links, you will quickly get 
lost among them. They are useful, but they are not a fresh report of what 
Apache Ozone’s S3 compatibility looks like today.
+
+Users don’t know whether Ozone really supports a specific S3 behavior. 
Developers don’t know whether a feature gap, implementation gap, or corner case 
is already handled correctly. And when a compatibility issue is fixed or newly 
introduced, there was no fresh source of truth to show that change.
+
+Also, when we develop S3 features, we often look at AWS S3 docs or source code 
from other open source S3-compatible systems, then infer how the implementation 
should behave and what test cases we should add. That works sometimes, but it 
is still mostly guessing. There was no easy harness to continuously test 
Ozone’s behavior against existing compatibility suites and make the result easy 
to inspect.
+
+So that’s why I wanted to create this dashboard.
+
+## How to use it?
+
+I usually think of the dashboard as having a few different modes.
+
+First, start from the latest run summary. The top cards show the current 
`s3-tests` and `mint` compatibility rate, eligible case count, pass/fail/error 
count, skipped count, and the delta compared with the previous run. This makes 
it easy to know whether today’s result is better, worse, or basically 
unchanged. One small detail here: the compatibility rate is `passed / (passed + 
failed + errored)`.
+
+![overview](overview.png)
+
+Second, use the search box as the main debugging entry point. You can search 
by suite, test name, run id, run date, source path, feature name, status, or 
failure text. For example, if you are working on object tagging, you can search 
for `tagging`; if you are looking at a specific failure from `s3-tests`, you 
can paste part of the error message. Search results show the matched fields, 
suite, run date, status, feature tags, and a short failure preview.
+![test-case-search](test-case-search.png)
+
+Third, click a search result. The modal shows the full failure detail, related 
metadata, a permalink, and the test code. For `s3-tests`, the dashboard can 
fetch the upstream source file and extract the Python test function, so you 
don’t need to jump between the report, GitHub, and your local checkout just to 
understand what the test is really asking for.
+
+![test-case-search-detail](test-case-search-detail.png)
+
+Fourth, open the current report detail. The page does not force-load all case 
details at the beginning. Instead, it loads summary first, then fetches the 
full run detail when you open the latest run or an archived run. Inside the run 
detail, you can inspect suites, feature summaries, individual failed cases, and 
log files.
+![run-overview](run-overview.png)
+![run-expanded](run-expanded.png)
+![run-detail](run-detail.png)
+
+Fifth, use the trend panel. The top-line trend is useful to see whether the 
overall compatibility is moving. The per-feature trend is even more useful 
because a single global number can hide what really changed. For example, a PR 
might only improve object tagging, bucket listing, copy object behavior, or 
some conditional-write corner case. Those changes are much easier to reason 
about feature by feature.
+
+![trend-panel](trend-panel.png)
+
+Sixth, use archived runs when you need history. Old runs are still there, but 
their details are loaded only when opened. This is helpful when you want to 
compare a failure today with an older run, or when a PR says “this test used to 
fail before the fix.”
+![archived-runs](archived-runs.png)
+
+Finally, the Parquet file inspector is there for people who want to inspect 
the published dataset itself. This is mostly for debugging the dashboard and 
data model, but it is surprisingly useful when you want to understand what 
files were generated, how many rows they contain, and whether the published 
data looks sane. Also thanks Xiangpeng for building the [Parquet 
Viewer](https://github.com/XiangpengHao/parquet-viewer), which let us inspect 
the parquet file content directly on the site.
+![parquet-file-inspector](parquet-file-inspector.png)
+![parquet-file-viewer](parquet-file-viewer.png)
+
+For PR authors, there is also a PR comparison workflow. It can run an Ozone PR 
head, compare it with the latest published main run, write a step summary, and 
optionally comment back on the Ozone PR. That is the part I like the most: 
compatibility is not just a dashboard to look at, but something you can wire 
into development review.
+
+## How is this built?
+
+For the very first version, I literally just prompted Codex with `gpt5.4 
xhigh`:
+
+:::info Prompt
+I want to create a repo that runs 
[https://github.com/ceph/s3-tests](https://github.com/ceph/s3-tests) and 
[https://github.com/minio/mint](https://github.com/minio/mint) on GitHub Action 
and generate the compatibility report page on GitHub Pages nightly. Make the 
page pretty. My desired steps that run in the GitHub Action are: clone the 
Ozone repo, pull latest master change, compile, start running cluster, run Mint 
and s3-tests to get result, compile result to be the page. We can show the 
compatibility rate of each feature for each test (`s3-tests`, `mint`) daily 
change as a chart at the page top, followed by the report page, then also 
include the old result expansion button to allow users to check a specific 
date’s running result. BTW I have the local clone of Ozone at 
`~/Documents/oss/apache/ozone`, you can look into it directly without searching 
the codebase on the website.
+:::
+
+Then it almost one-shotted this. Actually I still made some follow-ups on the 
result, like “attach `s3-tests` and `mint` as submodule” and “use `act` to test 
the GitHub Action really works locally within Docker”, but those were 
relatively minor compared with the first scaffold.
+
+The nightly workflow now does roughly this:
+
+1. Build the Vue/Vite report frontend.
+2. Clone Ozone and the upstream compatibility suites.
+3. Build an Ozone distribution.
+4. Start a packaged Ozone compose cluster.
+5. Run `s3-tests` and Mint against the S3 Gateway.
+6. Normalize the raw output into a run result.
+7. Build the static Pages output, including the historical data.
+8. Publish to `gh-pages` for scheduled runs.
+
+The frontend is Vue 3 \+ Vite. The backend-ish part is just scripts and GitHub 
Actions. The data processing is mostly Python. For the newer version, the 
published report data is JSON.
+
+### Optimization
+
+After a few runs, I started to notice that the dashboard was becoming laggy. 
After some inspection, I found a few reasons.
+
+1. First, we originally used one JSON file to represent one run result. Each 
latest run was about 0.236 MiB. This sounds small, but the problem is that we 
did not lazy load these files at the beginning. Every time the page refreshed, 
even if some files might already be cached by the browser, the TypeScript data 
structure still ended up holding too much content from too many files. That is 
very memory-consuming.
+
+2. Second, the JSON data had a ton of room to compress. The data shape is very 
repetitive: `run_id`, `suite_key`, `status`, feature names, source paths, class 
names, test names, and similar object keys appear again and again. JSON stores 
all of that as repeated text and nested objects. Even if HTTP compression helps 
over the network, the browser still has to parse it into JavaScript objects, 
and Git still stores changed blobs. This kind of data is much closer to a table 
than a document, so a columnar format makes more sense.
+
+3. Finally, the search index data was not normalized correctly. The index 
repeated run metadata and case metadata too much, and it grew quickly. For Git 
history, this is especially bad because every new run changes a large generated 
file again.
+
+So then I basically applied three optimizations: lazy loading, Parquet 
compression, and search/index normalization.
+
+1. **Lazy loading.** The page now loads the light catalog/index first. Full 
run details are fetched only when you open the latest run or expand an archived 
run. Search index loading is also delayed until you actually search, and the 
browser can keep the FlexSearch index in IndexedDB. Logs are fetched only when 
you open a log modal. Source snippets are fetched only when you open a case. 
This makes the first page load much cheaper.
+2. **Compress data as Parquet.** Instead of treating every run as one large 
JSON document, the report data is split into Parquet tables: catalog runs, 
suites, features, per-run metadata, per-run cases, search rows, log files, and 
log lines. The Parquet writer uses Zstd compression and dictionary encoding, 
which is a much better fit for repeated values like suite names, statuses, 
feature tags, and source paths. The frontend then queries these Parquet files 
in the browser through DuckDB-Wasm.
+3. **Index file optimization.** The search rows now contain normalized fields 
and a short `detail_preview`, while the full case detail can be hydrated from 
the per-run case Parquet file when needed. For JSON fallback, the index and 
search data are partitioned into smaller shards. For the normal Parquet path, 
the global search index is a compressed Parquet file. The search index also has 
a stable `index_id`, so the browser can reuse the IndexedDB cache when the data 
has not changed.
+
+Result is crazy:
+
+1. Parquet data now:
+   1. search rows: 7.64 MiB, 33,876 rows, growing about 0.142-0.147 MiB/run
+   2. run case/detail data excluding search: 4.92 MiB across 52 runs, growing 
about 0.093 MiB/run
+   3. catalog/index data: 0.03 MiB now, growing less than 1 KiB/run
+   4. total Pages data: 12.59 MiB across 52 runs
+   5. latest run data: 246,696 bytes \= 0.235 MiB
+2. Projection at the current rate:
+   1. about \+0.236 MiB/run
+   2. about \+7.1 MiB/month
+   3. about \+86 MiB/year
+2. Compared with the JSON baseline:
+   1. current data size: 149.11 MiB \-\> 12.59 MiB, about 11.8x smaller
+   2. yearly growth: \~1.0 GiB/year \-\> \~86 MiB/year, about 12x slower
+   3. search data: 107.09 MiB \-\> 7.64 MiB, about 14x smaller
+
+## Current Effect
+
+Ozone has already improved since the dashboard was released.
+![s3-tests-compatibility-rate](s3-tests-compatibility-rate.png)
+
+I don’t want to overclaim that every improvement below was caused only by this 
dashboard, but I do think the dashboard changed the workflow. It gives us 
concrete failing cases, links that can be pasted into PRs, and an easy way to 
check whether the gap is still there after a patch.

Review Comment:
   or "I don’t want to take credit for every improvement ..."



-- 
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: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to