Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ARROW-15906: [C++][Python][R] By default, don't create or delete S3 buckets #13206

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Jun 15, 2022

Conversation

wjones127
Copy link
Member

@wjones127 wjones127 commented May 20, 2022

BREAKING CHANGE: modifies S3FileSystem to not allow creating or deleting buckets by default. Two new options are added: allow_bucket_creation, which enables creating buckets, and allow_bucket_deletion, which enables deleting buckets.

Outside of tests, most use cases will not want to create or delete buckets, and doing so accidentally is not desirable either. Buckets have governance controls like permissions and cost-tracking tags.

To make it easy for users to transition, the FromUri method also supports these arguments:

from pyarrow.fs import FileSystem

uri = "s3://minioadmin:minioadmin@?scheme=http&endpoint_override=localhost%3A9000"
fs, path = FileSystem.from_uri(uri)

fs.create_dir("test")
# Traceback (most recent call last):
#   File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
#   File "pyarrow/_fs.pyx", line 463, in pyarrow._fs.FileSystem.create_dir
#     check_status(self.fs.CreateDir(directory, recursive=recursive))
#   File "pyarrow/error.pxi", line 115, in pyarrow.lib.check_status
#     raise IOError(message)
# OSError: Bucket 'test' not found. To create buckets, enable the allow_bucket_creation option.
uri = uri + "&allow_bucket_creation=True&allow_bucket_deletion=True"
fs, path = FileSystem.from_uri(uri)

fs.create_dir("test")
fs.delete_dir("test")
fs <- FileSystem$from_uri("s3://minioadmin:minioadmin@?scheme=http&endpoint_override=localhost%3A9000")$fs
fs$CreateDir("test")
#> Error: IOError: Bucket 'test' not found. To create buckets, enable the allow_bucket_creation option.

fs <- FileSystem$from_uri(
    paste0("s3://minioadmin:minioadmin@?scheme=http&endpoint_override=localhost%3A9000",
           "&allow_bucket_creation=TRUE&allow_bucket_deletion=TRUE")
    )$fs
fs$CreateDir("test")
fs$DeleteDir("test")

@github-actions
Copy link

@wjones127 wjones127 changed the title ARROW-15906: [C++][Python][R] By default, don't create or delete buckets ARROW-15906: [C++][Python][R] By default, don't create or delete S3 buckets May 20, 2022
@wjones127 wjones127 marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2022 22:12
@@ -130,6 +130,9 @@ struct ARROW_EXPORT S3Options {
/// Whether OutputStream writes will be issued in the background, without blocking.
bool background_writes = true;

/// Whether to allow creation of new buckets
bool allow_create_buckets = false;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you also update S3Options::FromUri() to support this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good idea. I've added that.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's make it two options for flexibility (creation and deletion).

Also wrt. naming, should this be allow_bucket_creation? @lidavidm

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Perhaps create_buckets and delete_buckets? That reads more consistently with background_writes to me. Or allow_creating_buckets

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I liked create_buckets but since there is a setter method and I want it named the same thing as the property (for clear error hints), I felt like allow_bucket_creation was the better choice.

@wjones127 wjones127 requested a review from kou May 24, 2022 17:06
Copy link
Member

@kou kou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you send an e-mail to dev@ to confirm whether this default behavior change is acceptable? I can't decide this because I haven't used Apache Arrow to access S3 yet.

@@ -130,6 +130,14 @@ struct ARROW_EXPORT S3Options {
/// Whether OutputStream writes will be issued in the background, without blocking.
bool background_writes = true;

/// Whether to allow creation or deletion of buckets
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems that "deletion" depends on allow_create_buckets confuses users. How about renaming allow_create_buckets or create one more option?

BTW, why should we disable "deletion" by default?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We probably don't have to. Buckets can only be deleted if already empty, so hard to accidentally delete an important one I suppose.

@wjones127
Copy link
Member Author

Could you send an e-mail to dev@ to confirm whether this default behavior change is acceptable? I can't decide this because I haven't used Apache Arrow to access S3 yet.

Sure, I've done that here: https://lists.apache.org/thread/2wnmq72trrtcxyvxzw261gq0t6grq18g

@@ -130,6 +130,9 @@ struct ARROW_EXPORT S3Options {
/// Whether OutputStream writes will be issued in the background, without blocking.
bool background_writes = true;

/// Whether to allow creation of new buckets
bool allow_create_buckets = false;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's make it two options for flexibility (creation and deletion).

Also wrt. naming, should this be allow_bucket_creation? @lidavidm

::arrow::internal::AsciiEqualsCaseInsensitive(kv.second, "true");
} else if (kv.first == "allow_bucket_deletion") {
options.allow_bucket_deletion =
::arrow::internal::AsciiEqualsCaseInsensitive(kv.second, "true");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, I think we should be a bit stricter and not blindly interpret any other value as "false".
How about allowing the following values:

  • "0", "false" (case-insensitive) -> boolean false
  • "1", "true" (case-insensitive) -> boolean true
  • any other value -> raise Status::Invalid

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good. I didn't see any existing utility function to do this, so maybe I will create one.

@@ -218,6 +229,12 @@ class ARROW_EXPORT S3FileSystem : public FileSystem {
/// Return the actual region this filesystem connects to
std::string region() const;

/// Set create_buckets property of options
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These trivial setters are not needed as people can access the attributes directly.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

options() returns a const reference; they could access but I don't think they could mutate right?

Being able to change this setting later felt important when I didn't support in FromURI, but maybe it's not as important now.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These trivial setters are not needed as people can access the attributes directly.

I'm not so sure that's true. This fails:

  auto options = fs_->options();
  options.allow_bucket_creation = true;
  options.allow_bucket_deletion = true;

  ASSERT_EQ(fs_->options().allow_bucket_creation, true);
  ASSERT_EQ(fs_->options().allow_bucket_deletion, true);

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, this is not really supported, though. You should set options before creating the filesystem.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, I think I'm fine at this point with only allowing setting them during construction, since we've added them to the URI parsing.

cpp/src/arrow/filesystem/s3fs.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@property
def allow_bucket_creation(self):
"""
Whether to allow CreateDir at the bucket-level.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should probably use the same docstring for constructor parameters and the associated properties.
Personally, I like "Whether to allow CreateDir at the bucket-level."

python/pyarrow/includes/libarrow_fs.pxd Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
r/R/filesystem.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@wjones127 wjones127 requested a review from pitrou June 3, 2022 19:46
Copy link
Member

@pitrou pitrou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot @wjones127 . Here are some more comments needing addressing.

cpp/src/arrow/filesystem/s3fs.cc Show resolved Hide resolved
python/pyarrow/_s3fs.pyx Show resolved Hide resolved
scheme='http'
scheme='http',
allow_bucket_creation=True,
allow_bucket_deletion=True
)
fs.create_dir(bucket)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you also add tests in test_s3_options?

python/pyarrow/tests/test_fs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@pitrou
Copy link
Member

pitrou commented Jun 6, 2022

@thisisnic @dragosmg Can one of you perhaps review the R changes?

@dragosmg
Copy link
Contributor

dragosmg commented Jun 6, 2022

LGTM, but I'd like the opinion of someone more experienced.

Copy link
Member

@thisisnic thisisnic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Generally LGTM, just one small comment/suggestions on the R tests.

Comment on lines 193 to 205
test_that("CreateDir fails on bucket if allow_bucket_creation=False", {
now_tmp <- paste0(now, "-test-fail-delete")
fs$CreateDir(now_tmp)

expect_error(
limited_fs$CreateDir("should-fail"),
regexp = "Bucket does not exist"
)
expect_error(
limited_fs$DeleteDir(now_tmp),
regexp = "Would delete bucket"
)
})
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if these tests might be better without the regexp parameter, given that the specific phrasing of them comes from the C++ layer, and we tend to avoid testing that component of the error message?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, I'll rewrite it so these messages are tested in C++ instead.

Copy link
Member

@pitrou pitrou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @wjones127 !

@pitrou pitrou merged commit c72f84a into apache:master Jun 15, 2022
@wjones127 wjones127 deleted the ARROW-15906-no-new-bucket branch June 15, 2022 10:10
kou pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 20, 2023
…Hub issue numbers (#34260)

Rewrite the Jira issue numbers to the GitHub issue numbers, so that the GitHub issue numbers are automatically linked to the issues by pkgdown's auto-linking feature.

Issue numbers have been rewritten based on the following correspondence.
Also, the pkgdown settings have been changed and updated to link to GitHub.

I generated the Changelog page using the `pkgdown::build_news()` function and verified that the links work correctly.

---
ARROW-6338	#5198
ARROW-6364	#5201
ARROW-6323	#5169
ARROW-6278	#5141
ARROW-6360	#5329
ARROW-6533	#5450
ARROW-6348	#5223
ARROW-6337	#5399
ARROW-10850	#9128
ARROW-10624	#9092
ARROW-10386	#8549
ARROW-6994	#23308
ARROW-12774	#10320
ARROW-12670	#10287
ARROW-16828	#13484
ARROW-14989	#13482
ARROW-16977	#13514
ARROW-13404	#10999
ARROW-16887	#13601
ARROW-15906	#13206
ARROW-15280	#13171
ARROW-16144	#13183
ARROW-16511	#13105
ARROW-16085	#13088
ARROW-16715	#13555
ARROW-16268	#13550
ARROW-16700	#13518
ARROW-16807	#13583
ARROW-16871	#13517
ARROW-16415	#13190
ARROW-14821	#12154
ARROW-16439	#13174
ARROW-16394	#13118
ARROW-16516	#13163
ARROW-16395	#13627
ARROW-14848	#12589
ARROW-16407	#13196
ARROW-16653	#13506
ARROW-14575	#13160
ARROW-15271	#13170
ARROW-16703	#13650
ARROW-16444	#13397
ARROW-15016	#13541
ARROW-16776	#13563
ARROW-15622	#13090
ARROW-18131	#14484
ARROW-18305	#14581
ARROW-18285	#14615
* Closes: #33631

Authored-by: SHIMA Tatsuya <ts1s1andn@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sutou Kouhei <kou@clear-code.com>
fatemehp pushed a commit to fatemehp/arrow that referenced this pull request Feb 24, 2023
…to GitHub issue numbers (apache#34260)

Rewrite the Jira issue numbers to the GitHub issue numbers, so that the GitHub issue numbers are automatically linked to the issues by pkgdown's auto-linking feature.

Issue numbers have been rewritten based on the following correspondence.
Also, the pkgdown settings have been changed and updated to link to GitHub.

I generated the Changelog page using the `pkgdown::build_news()` function and verified that the links work correctly.

---
ARROW-6338	apache#5198
ARROW-6364	apache#5201
ARROW-6323	apache#5169
ARROW-6278	apache#5141
ARROW-6360	apache#5329
ARROW-6533	apache#5450
ARROW-6348	apache#5223
ARROW-6337	apache#5399
ARROW-10850	apache#9128
ARROW-10624	apache#9092
ARROW-10386	apache#8549
ARROW-6994	apache#23308
ARROW-12774	apache#10320
ARROW-12670	apache#10287
ARROW-16828	apache#13484
ARROW-14989	apache#13482
ARROW-16977	apache#13514
ARROW-13404	apache#10999
ARROW-16887	apache#13601
ARROW-15906	apache#13206
ARROW-15280	apache#13171
ARROW-16144	apache#13183
ARROW-16511	apache#13105
ARROW-16085	apache#13088
ARROW-16715	apache#13555
ARROW-16268	apache#13550
ARROW-16700	apache#13518
ARROW-16807	apache#13583
ARROW-16871	apache#13517
ARROW-16415	apache#13190
ARROW-14821	apache#12154
ARROW-16439	apache#13174
ARROW-16394	apache#13118
ARROW-16516	apache#13163
ARROW-16395	apache#13627
ARROW-14848	apache#12589
ARROW-16407	apache#13196
ARROW-16653	apache#13506
ARROW-14575	apache#13160
ARROW-15271	apache#13170
ARROW-16703	apache#13650
ARROW-16444	apache#13397
ARROW-15016	apache#13541
ARROW-16776	apache#13563
ARROW-15622	apache#13090
ARROW-18131	apache#14484
ARROW-18305	apache#14581
ARROW-18285	apache#14615
* Closes: apache#33631

Authored-by: SHIMA Tatsuya <ts1s1andn@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sutou Kouhei <kou@clear-code.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants