Re: [I] [Improvement] Authorization performance: the list roles api cost much time if a normal user with the privileges managing roles [gravitino]

Tue, 18 Nov 2025 18:54:09 -0800 


hdygxsj commented on issue #9168:
URL: https://github.com/apache/gravitino/issues/9168#issuecomment-3550423486

   Can you provide a flame graph?
   
   
   
   > > > cc [@hdygxsj](https://github.com/hdygxsj)
   > > 
   > > 
   > > This is expected result. Originally, manage_grants was not supported; 
after adding support for manage_grants, a significant number of additional 
authorization checks were introduced.
   > > Before support for manage_grants was added, listing roles did not 
require loading RBAC permissions in JCasbin; now it does.
   > 
   > when the package is not included 
[#9114](https://github.com/apache/gravitino/pull/9114), the testing result is 
as following, 1st call cost more time, almost 15s
   > 
   > <img alt="Image" width="1920" height="462" 
src="https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/154112360/516037024-3c818697-37f5-4f7a-ba91-1902a443ec67.png?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3NjM1MjA2NzcsIm5iZiI6MTc2MzUyMDM3NywicGF0aCI6Ii8xNTQxMTIzNjAvNTE2MDM3MDI0LTNjODE4Njk3LTM3ZjUtNGY3YS1iYTkxLTE5MDJhNDQzZWM2Ny5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjUxMTE5JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI1MTExOVQwMjQ2MTdaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT0zOGRlYTZmMTZiOTczODBhM2M0MWJmYTlmM2IwMThmM2MzNmMxYjQ0MGY1MjA3MjU4NzM3ZmVkM2Q2ZmQ3ZTllJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCJ9.uIqnitXpsZqzFv6UljvyhfoB8Xax7Iqvwb5vQPZGLY8";>
   
   Can you provide a flame graph?
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to