ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user #8211

thotz · 2021-06-28T10:31:34Z

Description of your changes:
Adding options for quota, bucket limit, caps for the
cephobjectstoreuser.
Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan thottanjiffin@gmail.com

Which issue is resolved by this Pull Request:
Resolves #7906

Checklist:

travisn

It will be great to have these settings on the object users! Maybe you're already planning on it, but please do add:

Documentation updates to ceph-object-store-user-crd.md
Example settings in object-user.yaml, perhaps commented out

pkg/apis/ceph.rook.io/v1/types.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

Documentation/ceph-object-store-user-crd.md

PendingReleaseNotes.md

pkg/apis/ceph.rook.io/v1/types.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

travisn

a couple small suggestions...

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller_test.go

travisn · 2021-08-12T14:19:10Z

The code changes look good and the new integration test will be very nice, thanks. The upgrade and smoke suites just seem to be failing if you could take a look. For example, this failure was seeing from the upgrade suite:

2021-08-12 09:20:18.517555 I | integrationTest: pool upgradepool is deleted
    suite.go:63: test panicked: runtime error: index out of range [0] with length 0
        goroutine 125 [running]:
        runtime/debug.Stack(0xc000879458, 0x1c48dc0, 0xc00070aac8)
        	/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.16.7/x64/src/runtime/debug/stack.go:24 +0x9f
        github.com/stretchr/testify/suite.failOnPanic(0xc0002d8c00)
        	/home/runner/go/pkg/mod/github.com/stretchr/testify@v1.7.0/suite/suite.go:63 +0x5b
        panic(0x1c48dc0, 0xc00070aac8)
        	/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.16.7/x64/src/runtime/panic.go:965 +0x1b9
        github.com/rook/rook/tests/integration.checkCephObjectUser(0xc0007e3190, 0xc0007e31a0, 0xc0002d8c00, 0xc000944730, 0xc0005e0510, 0x1d73c9e, 0xa, 0x1d7ac45, 0xf, 0x1d77c33, ...)
        	/home/runner/work/rook/rook/tests/integration/ceph_base_object_test.go:155 +0x98f

thotz · 2021-08-12T17:30:54Z

The code changes look good and the new integration test will be very nice, thanks. The upgrade and smoke suites just seem to be failing if you could take a look. For example, this failure was seeing from the upgrade suite:

2021-08-12 09:20:18.517555 I | integrationTest: pool upgradepool is deleted
    suite.go:63: test panicked: runtime error: index out of range [0] with length 0
        goroutine 125 [running]:
        runtime/debug.Stack(0xc000879458, 0x1c48dc0, 0xc00070aac8)
        	/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.16.7/x64/src/runtime/debug/stack.go:24 +0x9f
        github.com/stretchr/testify/suite.failOnPanic(0xc0002d8c00)
        	/home/runner/go/pkg/mod/github.com/stretchr/testify@v1.7.0/suite/suite.go:63 +0x5b
        panic(0x1c48dc0, 0xc00070aac8)
        	/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.16.7/x64/src/runtime/panic.go:965 +0x1b9
        github.com/rook/rook/tests/integration.checkCephObjectUser(0xc0007e3190, 0xc0007e31a0, 0xc0002d8c00, 0xc000944730, 0xc0005e0510, 0x1d73c9e, 0xa, 0x1d7ac45, 0xf, 0x1d77c33, ...)
        	/home/runner/work/rook/rook/tests/integration/ceph_base_object_test.go:155 +0x98f

@travisn : I hope above failures

travisn · 2021-08-12T21:37:43Z

The smoke suite is passing. Now the upgrade test is just failing. Since the settings are not applied before the upgrade, looks like we just need to check for different values in that case.

   ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:157
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 1
        	            	actual  : 1000
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster
    ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:158
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 2
        	            	actual  : 0
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster
    ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:159
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 100000
        	            	actual  : 0
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster

thotz · 2021-08-13T06:51:25Z

The smoke suite is passing. Now the upgrade test is just failing. Since the settings are not applied before the upgrade, looks like we just need to check for different values in that case.

   ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:157
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 1
        	            	actual  : 1000
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster
    ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:158
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 2
        	            	actual  : 0
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster
    ceph_upgrade_test.go:197: 
        	Error Trace:	ceph_base_object_test.go:159
        	            				ceph_upgrade_test.go:197
        	Error:      	Not equal: 
        	            	expected: 100000
        	            	actual  : 0
        	Test:       	TestCephUpgradeSuite/TestUpgradeToMaster

Done. PTAL @travisn

travisn

Great to see the tests passing, just one more suggestion...

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user.go

Documentation/ceph-object-store-user-crd.md

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-02T18:46:06Z

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

+	if user.Spec.Capabilities != nil {
+		if user.Spec.Capabilities.User != "" {
+			userConfig.UserCaps += fmt.Sprintf("users=%s;", user.Spec.Capabilities.User)
+		}
+		if user.Spec.Capabilities.Bucket != "" {
+			userConfig.UserCaps += fmt.Sprintf("buckets=%s;", user.Spec.Capabilities.Bucket)
+		}
+		if user.Spec.Capabilities.MetaData != "" {
+			userConfig.UserCaps += fmt.Sprintf("metadata=%s;", user.Spec.Capabilities.MetaData)
+		}
+		if user.Spec.Capabilities.Usage != "" {
+			userConfig.UserCaps += fmt.Sprintf("usage=%s;", user.Spec.Capabilities.Usage)
+		}
+		if user.Spec.Capabilities.Zone != "" {
+			userConfig.UserCaps += fmt.Sprintf("zone=%s;", user.Spec.Capabilities.Zone)
+		}
+	}


Similarly to my question about removing quotas, does this allow caps to be revoked? What if a CephObjectStoreUser needs to have some permissions revoked after being given permissions (like the admin made an initial mistake)? Should we always set capabilities even if user.Spec.Capabilities is nil so that permissions can be easily revoked?

@BlaineEXE : Apparently, it looks like either bug in go-ceph or rgw(most likely) or updating caps is not working atm. It can be performed only while CreateUser API() not with ModifyUser(), even though the request is filled with caps details. I have mentioned the same in ceph-object-user-crd.md

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller_test.go

pkg/apis/ceph.rook.io/v1/types.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-02T19:23:31Z

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

+	if user.Spec.Quotas != nil && user.Spec.Quotas.MaxBuckets != 0 {
+		userConfig.MaxBuckets = &user.Spec.Quotas.MaxBuckets
+	}


admin.User has a UserQuota spec inside of it which is the same thing set in the above code. Why are we setting bucket quotas at a different point in the code from the rest of the quotas? Is it not better to just set everything all at once upon user creation? (i.e., move the other quota code here)

That's how RGW adminOps apis works, maxBucket is not part of quota Spec. And we can set quota(I mean object and size) only after successful user creation, not during the CreateUser(). Hence I moved to setquota() after the success of user creation. So I cannot move the quota code here. The setting MaxBuckets can be moved to another quota code part, but it requires another additional ModifyUser() api call. So I kept the MaxBuckets during the creation of User and other quotas after user creation.

thotz · 2021-09-03T14:45:38Z

pkg/apis/ceph.rook.io/v1/types.go

+	// Maximum bucket limit for the ceph user
+	// +optional
+	// +nullable
+	MaxBuckets *int `json:"maxBuckets,omitempty"`


set MaxBuckets to *int and MaxObjects into int64* only based on admin.User Struct form go ceph

BlaineEXE

Thanks for your patience and paying close attention to this.

It's really unfortunate that capabilities can't be modified or removed once they are set due to a Ceph (or go-ceph) bug. Thanks for noting and documenting that.

From a feature perspective, I'm trying to understand what are the necessary steps to take after this PR merges. In my opinion, modifying and removing caps is required for us to call this feature complete. Users expect that of a declarative configuration system like Rook. Some questions to help me:

Is this for a BZ feature request? If so, we should make sure we have deletion done before that BZ is closed, or we should document the workaround with the docs team
Is there a tracker in Ceph to fix the issue from the Ceph side so we can follow up later with update/removal features in Rook?

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller_test.go

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

thotz · 2021-09-03T17:32:32Z

Thanks for your patience and paying close attention to this.

It's really unfortunate that capabilities can't be modified or removed once they are set due to a Ceph (or go-ceph) bug. Thanks for noting and documenting that.

From a feature perspective, I'm trying to understand what are the necessary steps to take after this PR merges. In my opinion, modifying and removing caps is required for us to call this feature complete. Users expect that of a declarative configuration system like Rook. Some questions to help me:

I completely agree.

* Is this for a BZ feature request? If so, we should make sure we have deletion done before that BZ is closed, or we should document the workaround with the docs team

* Is there a tracker in Ceph to fix the issue from the Ceph side so we can follow up later with update/removal features in Rook?

Quick look didn't give any bugs, I will try to debug further to know whether issue with go-ceph or on rgw. At least on rasdowgw-admin cli modifying caps works fine. I will open bz/github/ceph tracker issue accordingly after getting a better idea and will open separate issue in Rook as well

thotz · 2021-09-06T16:40:02Z

Thanks for your patience and paying close attention to this.
It's really unfortunate that capabilities can't be modified or removed once they are set due to a Ceph (or go-ceph) bug. Thanks for noting and documenting that.
From a feature perspective, I'm trying to understand what are the necessary steps to take after this PR merges. In my opinion, modifying and removing caps is required for us to call this feature complete. Users expect that of a declarative configuration system like Rook. Some questions to help me:

I completely agree.
* Is this for a BZ feature request? If so, we should make sure we have deletion done before that BZ is closed, or we should document the workaround with the docs team

* Is there a tracker in Ceph to fix the issue from the Ceph side so we can follow up later with update/removal features in Rook?
Quick look didn't give any bugs, I will try to debug further to know whether issue with go-ceph or on rgw. At least on rasdowgw-admin cli modifying caps works fine. I will open bz/github/ceph tracker issue accordingly after getting a better idea and will open separate issue in Rook as well

Create https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/52521 in RGW to track this issue. Currently, RGW code does not handle the caps in the modifyuserAPI request().

thotz · 2021-09-07T11:18:51Z

Thanks for your patience and paying close attention to this.
It's really unfortunate that capabilities can't be modified or removed once they are set due to a Ceph (or go-ceph) bug. Thanks for noting and documenting that.
From a feature perspective, I'm trying to understand what are the necessary steps to take after this PR merges. In my opinion, modifying and removing caps is required for us to call this feature complete. Users expect that of a declarative configuration system like Rook. Some questions to help me:

I completely agree.
* Is this for a BZ feature request? If so, we should make sure we have deletion done before that BZ is closed, or we should document the workaround with the docs team

* Is there a tracker in Ceph to fix the issue from the Ceph side so we can follow up later with update/removal features in Rook?
Quick look didn't give any bugs, I will try to debug further to know whether issue with go-ceph or on rgw. At least on rasdowgw-admin cli modifying caps works fine. I will open bz/github/ceph tracker issue accordingly after getting a better idea and will open separate issue in Rook as well

Create https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/52521 in RGW to track this issue. Currently, RGW code does not handle the caps in the modifyuserAPI request().

Thanks for your patience and paying close attention to this.
It's really unfortunate that capabilities can't be modified or removed once they are set due to a Ceph (or go-ceph) bug. Thanks for noting and documenting that.
From a feature perspective, I'm trying to understand what are the necessary steps to take after this PR merges. In my opinion, modifying and removing caps is required for us to call this feature complete. Users expect that of a declarative configuration system like Rook. Some questions to help me:

I completely agree.
* Is this for a BZ feature request? If so, we should make sure we have deletion done before that BZ is closed, or we should document the workaround with the docs team

* Is there a tracker in Ceph to fix the issue from the Ceph side so we can follow up later with update/removal features in Rook?
Quick look didn't give any bugs, I will try to debug further to know whether issue with go-ceph or on rgw. At least on rasdowgw-admin cli modifying caps works fine. I will open bz/github/ceph tracker issue accordingly after getting a better idea and will open separate issue in Rook as well

We can use different approach here as well, instead of ModifyUser() API. We can have apis adding/removing for Caps() similar to quota, but it does not exist in go-ceph or not mentioned in RGW upstream adminOps docs. But the supported code exists in ceph-rgw

mergify · 2021-09-07T16:01:31Z

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be merged. @thotz please rebase it. https://rook.io/docs/rook/master/development-flow.html#updating-your-fork

Adding options for quota, bucket limit, caps for the `cephobjectstoreuser`. Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

BlaineEXE

I am approving this PR with some nit comments to update docs and comments. Feel free to update the nits and merge the PR afterwards, or you can create a new PR to address the nits if you prefer.

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-08T17:04:04Z

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go

@@ -281,13 +281,44 @@ func (r *ReconcileObjectStoreUser) createorUpdateCephUser(u *cephv1.CephObjectSt
 		} else {
 			return errors.Wrapf(err, "failed to get details from ceph object user %q", u.Name)
 		}
+	} else if *user.MaxBuckets != *r.userConfig.MaxBuckets {
+		// TODO handle update for user capabilities


Nit. Let's link to the Ceph issue tracker here so we understand what is blocking Rook currently.

https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/52521

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-08T17:04:52Z

tests/integration/ceph_base_object_test.go

@@ -149,6 +153,17 @@ func checkCephObjectUser(
 		assert.NoError(s.T(), err)
 		assert.Equal(s.T(), k8sutil.ReadyStatus, phase)
 	}
+	if checkQuotaAndCaps {
+		// following fields in CephObjectStoreUser CRD doesn't exist before Rook v1.7


Suggested change

// following fields in CephObjectStoreUser CRD doesn't exist before Rook v1.7

// following fields in CephObjectStoreUser CRD doesn't exist before Rook v1.7.3

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-08T17:05:51Z

Documentation/ceph-object-store-user-crd.md

+    * `maxBuckets`: The maximum bucket limit for the user.
+    * `maxSize`: Maximum size limit of all objects across all the user's buckets.
+    * `maxObjects`: Maximum number of objects across all the user's buckets.
+* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions(support added from onwards v1.7.3).


Suggested change

* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions(support added from onwards v1.7.3).

* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions (supported in Rook v1.7.3 and up).

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-08T17:07:18Z

Documentation/ceph-object-store-user-crd.md

+    * `maxSize`: Maximum size limit of all objects across all the user's buckets.
+    * `maxObjects`: Maximum number of objects across all the user's buckets.
+* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions(support added from onwards v1.7.3).
+  P.S this setting can used only during the creation of the object store user, not afterwards.


Suggested change

P.S this setting can used only during the creation of the object store user, not afterwards.

Due to a bug in Ceph, this setting can currently only be used during the creation of the object store user. If a user's capabilities need modified, the user must be deleted and re-created.

BlaineEXE · 2021-09-08T17:07:48Z

Documentation/ceph-object-store-user-crd.md

@@ -33,3 +40,17 @@ spec:

 * `store`: The object store in which the user will be created. This matches the name of the objectstore CRD.
 * `displayName`: The display name which will be passed to the `radosgw-admin user create` command.
+* `quotas`: This represents quota limitation can be set on the user(support added from onwards v1.7.3).


Suggested change

* `quotas`: This represents quota limitation can be set on the user(support added from onwards v1.7.3).

* `quotas`: Quota limitations to be set on the user (supported in Rook v1.7.3 and up).

thotz · 2021-09-08T17:33:15Z

I am approving this PR with some nit comments to update docs and comments. Feel free to update the nits and merge the PR afterwards, or you can create a new PR to address the nits if you prefer.

@BlaineEXE : May I address the nits after the merge of this PR as a separate one?

Addressing remaining nits from the PR rook#8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user (backport #8211)

ceph: addressing nits from #8211

Addressing remaining nits from the PR #8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 50ecff8)

ceph: addressing nits from #8211 (backport #8667)

Addressing remaining nits from the PR rook#8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

thotz added do-not-merge DO NOT MERGE :) WIP Work in Progress labels Jun 28, 2021

mergify bot added the ceph main ceph tag label Jun 28, 2021

travisn requested changes Jun 28, 2021

View reviewed changes

travisn requested changes Jun 29, 2021

View reviewed changes

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from 668aaa4 to 0cb3b52 Compare August 9, 2021 12:27

thotz requested a review from travisn August 9, 2021 13:07

travisn requested changes Aug 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from 0cb3b52 to f294a5b Compare August 11, 2021 10:15

thotz requested a review from travisn August 11, 2021 10:16

thotz removed do-not-merge DO NOT MERGE :) WIP Work in Progress labels Aug 11, 2021

travisn requested changes Aug 11, 2021

View reviewed changes

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user/controller_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch 3 times, most recently from 1a639d7 to b82b353 Compare August 12, 2021 09:05

thotz requested a review from travisn August 12, 2021 09:06

thotz added the backport-release-1.7 label Aug 12, 2021

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from b82b353 to daf9437 Compare August 12, 2021 17:29

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from daf9437 to b482e51 Compare August 12, 2021 18:59

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from b482e51 to 9891e88 Compare August 13, 2021 05:39

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from 9891e88 to bf7e3cb Compare August 19, 2021 06:24

travisn reviewed Aug 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from bf7e3cb to f5aba7d Compare August 19, 2021 18:24

thotz requested a review from travisn August 19, 2021 18:49

travisn reviewed Aug 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

pkg/operator/ceph/object/user.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

BlaineEXE requested changes Sep 2, 2021

View reviewed changes

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch 3 times, most recently from f0755e0 to 73d332b Compare September 3, 2021 13:35

thotz requested a review from BlaineEXE September 3, 2021 13:37

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch 2 times, most recently from 1e6a35e to e6db4ef Compare September 3, 2021 14:43

thotz commented Sep 3, 2021

View reviewed changes

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from e6db4ef to ba0c756 Compare September 3, 2021 16:06

BlaineEXE requested changes Sep 3, 2021

View reviewed changes

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from ba0c756 to cea9566 Compare September 3, 2021 18:06

thotz requested a review from BlaineEXE September 3, 2021 18:09

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user

ca43800

Adding options for quota, bucket limit, caps for the `cephobjectstoreuser`. Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

thotz force-pushed the enhancecephuser branch from cea9566 to ca43800 Compare September 7, 2021 17:20

BlaineEXE approved these changes Sep 8, 2021

View reviewed changes

BlaineEXE merged commit 5b0785d into rook:master Sep 8, 2021

mergify bot mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2021

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user (backport #8211) #8662

Merged

thotz added a commit to thotz/rook that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2021

ceph: addressing nits from rook#8211

50ecff8

Addressing remaining nits from the PR rook#8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

thotz mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2021

ceph: addressing nits from #8211 #8667

Merged

10 tasks

mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2021

Merge pull request #8662 from rook/mergify/bp/release-1.7/pr-8211

d418a13

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user (backport #8211)

BlaineEXE added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2021

Merge pull request #8667 from thotz/enhanceusernits

eed91ef

ceph: addressing nits from #8211

mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2021

ceph: addressing nits from #8211

72e9ebd

Addressing remaining nits from the PR #8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com> (cherry picked from commit 50ecff8)

BlaineEXE mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2021

Allow updating CephObjectUser capabilities #8683

Closed

BlaineEXE added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2021

Merge pull request #8682 from rook/mergify/bp/release-1.7/pr-8667

9d40d5c

ceph: addressing nits from #8211 (backport #8667)

subhamkrai pushed a commit to subhamkrai/rook that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2021

ceph: addressing nits from rook#8211

1af5613

Addressing remaining nits from the PR rook#8211 Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <thottanjiffin@gmail.com>

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user #8211

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user #8211

thotz commented Jun 28, 2021

travisn left a comment

travisn left a comment

travisn commented Aug 12, 2021

thotz commented Aug 12, 2021

travisn commented Aug 12, 2021

thotz commented Aug 13, 2021

travisn left a comment

BlaineEXE Sep 2, 2021

thotz Sep 3, 2021

BlaineEXE Sep 2, 2021

thotz Sep 3, 2021

thotz Sep 3, 2021

BlaineEXE left a comment

thotz commented Sep 3, 2021 •

edited

thotz commented Sep 6, 2021

thotz commented Sep 7, 2021

mergify bot commented Sep 7, 2021

BlaineEXE left a comment

BlaineEXE Sep 8, 2021

BlaineEXE Sep 8, 2021

BlaineEXE Sep 8, 2021

BlaineEXE Sep 8, 2021

BlaineEXE Sep 8, 2021

thotz commented Sep 8, 2021

	// following fields in CephObjectStoreUser CRD doesn't exist before Rook v1.7
	// following fields in CephObjectStoreUser CRD doesn't exist before Rook v1.7.3

	* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions(support added from onwards v1.7.3).
	* `capabilities`: Ceph allows users to be given additional permissions (supported in Rook v1.7.3 and up).

	P.S this setting can used only during the creation of the object store user, not afterwards.
	Due to a bug in Ceph, this setting can currently only be used during the creation of the object store user. If a user's capabilities need modified, the user must be deleted and re-created.

	* `quotas`: This represents quota limitation can be set on the user(support added from onwards v1.7.3).
	* `quotas`: Quota limitations to be set on the user (supported in Rook v1.7.3 and up).

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user #8211

ceph: add options for cephobjectstore user #8211

Conversation

thotz commented Jun 28, 2021

travisn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

travisn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

travisn commented Aug 12, 2021

thotz commented Aug 12, 2021

travisn commented Aug 12, 2021

thotz commented Aug 13, 2021

travisn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

BlaineEXE left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

thotz commented Sep 3, 2021 • edited

thotz commented Sep 6, 2021

thotz commented Sep 7, 2021

mergify bot commented Sep 7, 2021

BlaineEXE left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

thotz commented Sep 8, 2021

thotz commented Sep 3, 2021 •

edited