Hao Hao has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12122 )

Change subject: KUDU-2543 pt 2: pass around default authz tokens
......................................................................


Patch Set 5:

(12 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/authz_token_cache.h
File src/kudu/client/authz_token_cache.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/authz_token_cache.h@134
PS5, Line 134: retrieve_authz_rpcs_
nit: why not name it 'authz_rpcs_' to match 'authz_tokens_'?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/client-internal.cc
File src/kudu/client/client-internal.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/client-internal.cc@466
PS5, Line 466: authz_token_cache_.Put
nit: use StoreAuthzToken() instead?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/client-test.cc
File src/kudu/client/client-test.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/client/client-test.cc@5853
PS5, Line 5853:       
client_->data_->RetrieveAuthzTokenAsync(client_table_.get(), 
s.AsStatusCallback(),
Is it possible to change the logic to create a new client and only retrieve 
authz token when there isn't one cached? So that we can have a deterministic 
result that there is only one RPC being sent in this case?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/auth_token_expire-itest.cc
File src/kudu/integration-tests/auth_token_expire-itest.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/auth_token_expire-itest.cc@143
PS5, Line 143:
nit: extra space.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/auth_token_expire-itest.cc@254
PS5, Line 254:
nit: space.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc
File src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@184
PS5, Line 184: Insert
nit: 'Inserts' to aligned with other comments style.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@205
PS5, Line 205: Get
nit: 'Gets'


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@281
PS5, Line 281:   LOG(INFO) << "Trying to use the wrong user's token...";
Can you add a comment to explain what is the expected behavior in this case? 
Especially why operations in L285 is expected to succeed.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@362
PS5, Line 362: ASSERT_OK(ScanFromTable(client_table_.get()));
Why not parameterized the functor here as well?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@369
PS5, Line 369: TestUnknownTsk
Should a similar test be exist for authn token as well?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@477
PS5, Line 477: TestMasterElectionStorms
Will a similar also apply for authn tokens? Also,  wondering how you consider 
what should be tested in auth_token_expire-itest and what should be in 
authz_token-itest?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12122/5/src/kudu/integration-tests/authz_token-itest.cc@523
PS5, Line 523: // Ensures the client can still communicate with servers that do 
not support
             : // authz tokens.
What happens if a old client try to communicate with servers that require authz 
tokens?



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12122
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I7971d652d6adc822167cf959bffd5f994a7ca565
Gerrit-Change-Number: 12122
Gerrit-PatchSet: 5
Gerrit-Owner: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Adar Dembo <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Hao Hao <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tidy Bot (241)
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 06:31:27 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to