On 08/14/2015 02:31 PM, David Lyle wrote:
I understand the reasoning, but there are use cases for indexing (re:
searchlight) and auditing that are completely unsupported in keystone
v3. As from keystone, I have no way to exhaustively list who has
accounts in my cloud using OpenStack APIs. That seems like a hole that
should be filled.
Not possible. Federation is a mapping from a remote service.
We don't have the data.
The only place where Keystone is likely to be holding on to users is for
service users.
This is not the Keystone team being stubborn. These are technical and
practical limitations based on how OpenStack is being deployed in the wild.
LDAP does not provide sufficient tools to do pagination in a practical
manner. LDAP does not guarantee ordering for query results, and there
is no limit and offset. Holding a cursor open is not allowed by
corporate IT.
Not to mention API consistency, which others have already brought up.
David
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Morgan Fainberg
<morgan.fainb...@gmail.com <mailto:morgan.fainb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
For the identity (users and groups) backend as long as we support
LDAP (and as side note federated users never show up in this list
anyway) and with the drive towards pushing all user management out
of keystone itself to ldap or other tools that do it better, I
don't see pagination as something we should be providing.
Providing an inconsistent user experience based on leaking
underlying implementation details is something I am very against.
This stance ensures that horizon and other tools like it will not
need to know underlying implementation details to provide a
consistent user experience. Unfortunately here we do need to cater
to the lowest common denominator and filtering/searching/limiting
is the clear common mechanism
With regards to resources (projects, domains, etc) since we no
longer support using LDAP (deprecated with removal in mitaka) I
have less strong feelings towards and wouldn't block efforts to
implement if it is not already available (if not available this is
likely a mitaka goal).
--Morgan
Sent via mobile
> On Aug 14, 2015, at 07:39, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com
<mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> On 08/14/2015 09:14 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
>> As a quick note the api-ref you are linking to has some
gaps/has not
>> been kept in sync with the official api specifications.
>>
>> The official API specification is located at
>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/keystone-specs/ (v2 and v3
sections
>> at the top) and there is a known open bug to work with the docs
team to
>> get this in sync (somehow).
>>
>> Unfortunately there are a number of cases especially with the
identity
>> backend where pagination just does not work (or works completely
>> unreliably) such as utilizing the ldap driver. Either a cursor
must be
>> maintained (problematic in REST) or the results could be wildly
>> different every single request meaning each page is not really
>> guaranteed to be the "next page" it could be the same/show
inconsistent
>> results. The second issue is that the pagination is not a good
UX even
>> where it works - the simple question is: if you can filter the
results
>> how many pages deep do you go before refining the query; think
of your
>> use of search engines.
>>
>> In light of these issues Keystone has opted for a filter / limit
>> (config). If the results exceed the limit there is a truncation
that
>> occurs and it is recommended extra filtering be applied to
reduce the
>> total number of results.
>>
>> This discussion has gone around a few times, pagination in
keystone is
>> not currently on the roadmap. In addition to the above doc bug, we
>> should work to better socialize this filter-over-paginate
methodology.
>
> I understand all the things you write above about the problems
that Keystone's underlying architecture (driver-based, not always
able to do pagination in the individual drivers). However, it
really does mean that Keystone is the only project in OpenStack
that behaves this way. All other services provide limit/marker
paginations, AFAIK, which is efficient and, while not the same UX
as a filtering methodology, is entirely compatible and
complementary to filtering.
>
> Best,
> -jay
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
<http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
