On 08/12/2013 09:22 PM, Miller, Mark M (EB SW Cloud - R&D - Corvallis)
wrote:
The main reason I use user lists (i.e. keystone user-list) is to get
the list of usernames/IDs for other keystone commands. I do not see
the value of showing all of the users in an LDAP server when they are
not part of the keystone database (i.e. do not have roles assigned to
them). Performing a "keystone user-list" command against the HP
Enterprise Directory locks up keystone for about 1 ½ hours in that it
will not perform any other commands until it is done. If it is
decided that user lists are necessary, then at a minimum they need to
be paged to return control back to keystone for another command.
We need a way to tell HP ED to limit the number of rows, and to do
filtering.
We have a bug for the second part. I'll open one for the limit.
Mark
*From:*Adam Young [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Monday, August 12, 2013 5:27 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] Pagination
On 08/12/2013 05:34 PM, Henry Nash wrote:
Hi
I'm working on extending the pagination into the backends. Right
now, we handle the pagination in the v3 controller class....and in
fact it is disabled right now and we return the whole list
irrespective of whether page/per-page is set in the query string,
e.g.:
Pagination is a broken concept. We should not be returning lists so
long that we need to paginate. Instead, we should have query limits,
and filters to refine the queries.
Some people are doing full user lists against LDAP. I don't need to
tell you how broken that is. Why do we allow user-list at the Domain
(or unscoped level)?
I'd argue that we should drop enumeration of objects in general, and
certainly limit the number of results that come back. Pagination in
LDAP requires cursors, and thus continuos connections from Keystone to
LDAP...this is not a scalable solution.
Do we really need this?
def*paginate*(cls, context, refs):
/"""Paginates a list of references by page & per_page query strings."""/
# FIXME(_dolph_): client needs to support pagination first
returnrefs
page = context[/'query_string'/].get(/'page'/, 1)
per_page = context[/'query_string'/].get(/'per_page'/, 30)
returnrefs[per_page * (page - 1):per_page * page]
I wonder both for the V3 controller (which still needs to handle
pagination for backends that do not support it) and the backends that
do....whether we could use wether 'page' is defined in the
query-string as an indicator as to whether we should paginate or not?
That way clients who can handle it can ask for it, those that
don'twill just get everything.
Henry
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
