Project

General

Profile

Bug #19577

ship radosgw-admin in ceph-common package

Added by Vasu Kulkarni 4 months ago. Updated 3 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
-
Target version:
-
Start date:
04/10/2017
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Source:
Tags:
Backport:
Regression:
No
Severity:
3 - minor
Reviewed:
Affected Versions:
ceph-qa-suite:
Release:
Needs Doc:
No

Description

Since radosgw-admin requires admin keys to operate, it makes sense to ship this with client packages so that it can be used for admin related operations

Related to:

https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible/issues/1351


$ ldd /usr/bin/radosgw-admin
linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x00007ffd6eb8d000)
librgw.so.2 => /lib64/librgw.so.2 (0x00007f9c0c5df000)
librados.so.2 => /lib64/librados.so.2 (0x00007f9c02e5e000)
libboost_system-mt.so.1.53.0 => /lib64/libboost_system-mt.so.1.53.0 (0x00007f9c02c59000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f9c02a3d000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007f9c02735000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007f9c0251e000)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f9c0215d000)
libssl3.so => /lib64/libssl3.so (0x00007f9c01f1a000)
libsmime3.so => /lib64/libsmime3.so (0x00007f9c01cf2000)
libnss3.so => /lib64/libnss3.so (0x00007f9c019cc000)
libnssutil3.so => /lib64/libnssutil3.so (0x00007f9c017a0000)
libplds4.so => /lib64/libplds4.so (0x00007f9c0159b000)
libplc4.so => /lib64/libplc4.so (0x00007f9c01396000)
libnspr4.so => /lib64/libnspr4.so (0x00007f9c01158000)
libcurl.so.4 => /lib64/libcurl.so.4 (0x00007f9c00eee000)
libexpat.so.1 => /lib64/libexpat.so.1 (0x00007f9c00cc4000)
libfcgi.so.0 => /lib64/libfcgi.so.0 (0x00007f9c00ab9000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib64/libresolv.so.2 (0x00007f9c0089e000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f9c0069a000)
libboost_thread-mt.so.1.53.0 => /lib64/libboost_thread-mt.so.1.53.0 (0x00007f9c00483000)
libboost_random-mt.so.1.53.0 => /lib64/libboost_random-mt.so.1.53.0 (0x00007f9c0027e000)
libblkid.so.1 => /lib64/libblkid.so.1 (0x00007f9c00040000)
libuuid.so.1 => /lib64/libuuid.so.1 (0x00007f9bffe3b000)
librt.so.1 => /lib64/librt.so.1 (0x00007f9bffc32000)
libboost_iostreams-mt.so.1.53.0 => /lib64/libboost_iostreams-mt.so.1.53.0 (0x00007f9bffa18000)
libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00007f9bff716000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f9c164c8000)
libz.so.1 => /lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00007f9bff4ff000)
libidn.so.11 => /lib64/libidn.so.11 (0x00007f9bff2cb000)
libssh2.so.1 => /lib64/libssh2.so.1 (0x00007f9bff0a1000)
libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /lib64/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 (0x00007f9bfee53000)
libkrb5.so.3 => /lib64/libkrb5.so.3 (0x00007f9bfeb6b000)
libk5crypto.so.3 => /lib64/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x00007f9bfe939000)
libcom_err.so.2 => /lib64/libcom_err.so.2 (0x00007f9bfe735000)
liblber-2.4.so.2 => /lib64/liblber-2.4.so.2 (0x00007f9bfe525000)
libldap-2.4.so.2 => /lib64/libldap-2.4.so.2 (0x00007f9bfe2d2000)
libnsl.so.1 => /lib64/libnsl.so.1 (0x00007f9bfe0b9000)
libbz2.so.1 => /lib64/libbz2.so.1 (0x00007f9bfdea8000)
libssl.so.10 => /lib64/libssl.so.10 (0x00007f9bfdc3a000)
libcrypto.so.10 => /lib64/libcrypto.so.10 (0x00007f9bfd84f000)
libkrb5support.so.0 => /lib64/libkrb5support.so.0 (0x00007f9bfd640000)
libkeyutils.so.1 => /lib64/libkeyutils.so.1 (0x00007f9bfd43c000)
libsasl2.so.3 => /lib64/libsasl2.so.3 (0x00007f9bfd21e000)
libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00007f9bfcff7000)
libcrypt.so.1 => /lib64/libcrypt.so.1 (0x00007f9bfcdbf000)
libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f9bfcb5e000)
libfreebl3.so => /lib64/libfreebl3.so (0x00007f9bfc95b000)

History

#1 Updated by Ken Dreyer 4 months ago

The original GitHub ticket mentioned ceph-common - what do you think about shipping it there?

#2 Updated by Vasu Kulkarni 4 months ago

Ken, yeah sorry for the confusion, correct it shoould be ceph-common and can be used on any monitor node.

#3 Updated by Ken Dreyer 4 months ago

  • Subject changed from ship radosgw-admin with ceph-mon to ship radosgw-admin in ceph-common package
  • Description updated (diff)

#4 Updated by Ken Dreyer 4 months ago

  • Backport set to jewel, kraken

#5 Updated by Ali Maredia 4 months ago

  • Assignee set to Ali Maredia

#6 Updated by Ken Dreyer 4 months ago

  • Backport deleted (jewel, kraken)

Ali and I discussed this, and it would be better to not backport this to jewel.

#7 Updated by Ali Maredia 4 months ago

Ken Dreyer wrote:

Ali and I discussed this, and it would be better to not backport this to jewel.

Here are some quick reasons in the discussion we had:

1. I don't want to give the users (especially those new to Ceph) the impression that the radosgw-admin command works without a running radosgw
2. Would someone have to test that the radosgw-admin command works on all client nodes before every release?
3. I don't like moving files around packages, especially in the middle of a stable release

At the end of the day I feel like the benefit isn't as much as the cost. Is there really a reason why the keys shouldn't be on rgw nodes? If the packages is in ceph-common and users run radosgw-admin commands from the rgw nodes then doesn't that defeat the purpose of moving the package? Is there really a benefit of running radosgw-admin from non-rgw client nodes?

#8 Updated by Vasu Kulkarni 4 months ago

My comments...

1. I don't want to give the users (especially those new to Ceph) the impression that the radosgw-admin command works without a running radosgw
This would be a improvement bug for radosg-admin, that can verify if the daemon is running or not

2. Would someone have to test that the radosgw-admin command works on all client nodes before every release?
I think the original idea was to get this into monitor nodes, we are not going to run this on client, the ceph-common was a way to get this in monitor node
which we use for various admin activities

#9 Updated by Ken Dreyer 4 months ago

  • Status changed from New to Need Review

#10 Updated by Ali Maredia 3 months ago

  • Status changed from Need Review to Resolved

Also available in: Atom PDF