[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-2115?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354354#comment-16354354
]
kalyan kumar kalvagadda commented on SENTRY-2115:
-------------------------------------------------
Summary of what path version-1 does.
*Scenario-1:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and sentry is started for the first
time.
*Scenario-2:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and current event-id from HMS is less
than last event-d processed by sentry
*Scenario-3:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and first event-id in the subsequent
pull is not greater than the last event-id processed by sentry by 1.
*New Behavior:* Full snapshots need not be taken in all
When Sentry detects out-of-sync situations, it should reset
SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID table and start processing the event in
HMS_NOTIFICATION_LOG from beginning.
*Scenario-4:* Initially HDFS sync was enabled and later disabled for while and
then HDFS sync is enabled and sentry service is restarted to get it to effect.
*New Behavior:* When Sentry detects out-of-sync situations, it should reset
SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID table and start processing the event in
HMS_NOTIFICATION_LOG from beginning.
To handle scenario explained in Scenario-4, sentry should reset the mapping
information when ever HDFS sync is disabled. That way it can learn from scratch
when the feature is enabled back. There is no value is holding stale data even
when we know it will have issues when the feature is enabled back.
> Incorrect behavior of HMsFollower when HDFSSync feature is disabled.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SENTRY-2115
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-2115
> Project: Sentry
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.1.0
> Reporter: kalyan kumar kalvagadda
> Assignee: kalyan kumar kalvagadda
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: SENTRY-2115.001.patch
>
>
> *Current Behavior,*
> *Scenario-1:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and sentry is started for the first
> time.
> * Sentry would take a full snapshot of HMS and just persists the event-id of
> the current notification-id of HMS into SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID.
> {color:#FF0000}This is wrong{color}
> *Scenario-2:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and current event-id from HMS is
> less than last event-d processed by sentry
> * Sentry would take a full snapshot of HMS and just persists the event-id of
> the current notification-id of HMS into SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID.
> {color:#FF0000}This is wrong{color}
> *Scenario-3:* When HDFS sync is disabled, and first event-id in the
> subsequent pull is not greater than the last event-id processed by sentry by
> 1.
> * Sentry would take a full snapshot of HMS and just persists the event-id of
> the current notification-id of HMS into
> SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID.{color:#FF0000} This is wrong{color}
> *Scenario-4:* Initially HDFS sync was enabled and later disabled for while
> and then HDFS sync is enabled and sentry service is restarted to get it to
> effect.
> * On disabling HDFS sync, HMSFollower would update the
> SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID table but not the MSentryPathChange table.
> When HDFS sync is enabled again, HMSFollower would continue fetching new
> notifications and process them and update the MSentryPathChange and
> MAuthzPathsMapping info. This is not correct as sentry would not take a
> snapshot and will not have any path-mapping information about HMS objects. As
> a result, HDFS will ACL will not be added for the existing HMS
> objects.{color:#FF0000} This is wrong.{color}
> *Correct Behavior:*
> * Full snapshots need not be taken in all Scenario-1, Scenario-2 and
> Scenario-3.
> * When Sentry detects out-of-sync situations, it should reset
> SENTRY_HMS_NOTIFICATION_ID table and start processing the event in
> HMS_NOTIFICATION_LOG from beginning.
> * To handle scenario explained in *Scenario-4,* sentry should reset the
> mapping information when ever HDFS sync is disabled. That way it can learn
> from scratch when the feature is enabled back. There is no value is holding
> stale data even when we know it will have issues when the feature is enabled
> back.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
