Support #8
Document differences from S3
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:
0%
Estimated time:
1.00 h
Tags:
Reviewed:
Affected Versions:
Pull request ID:
Description
RGW is a pretty good implementation, but it does have some differences from the S3 api. Document these.
They include: lack of S3's new versioning, no email-based ACLs (though the required framework is largely in-place), all users getting anon_user permissions, and rgw doesn't watch for replayed operations (this is an S3 security measure to prevent attacks on somebody's secret ID).
History
#1 Updated by Greg Farnum over 9 years ago
- Due date set to 04/14/2010
- Assignee set to Greg Farnum
- Estimated time set to 1.00 h
#2 Updated by Greg Farnum over 9 years ago
- Tracker changed from Bug to Support
#3 Updated by Greg Farnum over 9 years ago
- Start date changed from 04/09/2010 to 04/14/2010
#4 Updated by Yehuda Sadeh over 9 years ago
We don't support HTTP POST at the moment.
#5 Updated by Greg Farnum over 9 years ago
- Due date deleted (
04/14/2010) - Start date deleted (
04/14/2010)
I'll probably just do this when I do the panel info for Kyle, when he asks. It doesn't need a due date.
#6 Updated by Greg Farnum over 9 years ago
- Status changed from New to Closed
It's on the wiki, now, anyway.
#7 Updated by Sage Weil over 8 years ago
- Category set to radosgw
#8 Updated by Sage Weil over 8 years ago
- Project changed from RADOS Gateway to Ceph
- Category changed from radosgw to 22
#9 Updated by John Spray over 1 year ago
- Project changed from Ceph to rgw
- Category deleted (
22)
Bulk reassign of radosgw category to RGW project.