> On Jan. 30, 2020, 2:48 p.m., Sarath Subramanian wrote: > > repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/audit/AbstractStorageBasedAuditRepository.java > > Line 161 (original), 161 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/72060/diff/1/?file=2210004#file2210004line161> > > > > how does adding a new field to hbase rowkey fix the issue? We are > > changing the rowkey format here. Will this be backward compatible? will > > older rows be retrieved using the new key format? Please review. > > Pinal Shah wrote: > **Issue-2: When we add label and delete label from multiple label > present, simultaneously, Only LABEL_ADD is audited** > > *how does adding a new field to hbase rowkey fix the issue?* > => As row_key(hbase) of both the audits were same, hbase couldnt insert > both the audits, for this we need unique row_key for each audit,so whenever > getKey() of AbstractStorageBasedAuditRepository class is called, it will > assure to return unique Key > > https://github.com/apache/atlas/blob/master/repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/audit/AbstractStorageBasedAuditRepository.java#L158 > > *We are changing the rowkey format here* > => Yes old row_key = <entityID>:<timestamp>:<index(of_forloop)> > new row_key = > <entityID>:<timestamp>:<index(of_forloop)>:<randomString> > https://github.com/apache/atlas/blob/master/repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/audit/AbstractStorageBasedAuditRepository.java#L158 > > *Will this be backward compatible? will older rows be retrieved using the > new key format?* > => Yes it will be backward compatible and will retrieve older rows. > => For retrieval, we make use of entityId and from the result, we extract > only entityId and timestamp from row_key > below is the snippet. > String[] parts = key.split(FIELD_SEPARATOR); > event.setEntityId(parts[0]); > event.setTimestamp(Long.valueOf(parts[1])); > > https://github.com/apache/atlas/blob/master/repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/audit/HBaseBasedAuditRepository.java#L464
Thanks for the detailed explanation Pinal. - Sarath ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/72060/#review219442 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 30, 2020, 4:10 a.m., Pinal Shah wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/72060/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 30, 2020, 4:10 a.m.) > > > Review request for atlas, Madhan Neethiraj, Nixon Rodrigues, and Sarath > Subramanian. > > > Bugs: ATLAS-3601 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ATLAS-3601 > > > Repository: atlas > > > Description > ------- > > 1) When 1 label among multiple labels is removed , LABEL_DELETE is audited. > But when all labels are deleted or the last label is deleted , no > LABEL_DELETE is audited. > 2)When we add label and delete label from multiple label present, > simultaneously, Only LABEL_ADD is audited > > > Diffs > ----- > > > repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/audit/AbstractStorageBasedAuditRepository.java > f6b741b5e > > repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/store/graph/v2/EntityGraphMapper.java > e427a59e7 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/72060/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > 1) Added one label - one audit for LABEL_ADD > 2) Added multiple labels simultaneously - one audit for LABEL_ADD,with > multiple label names in Details > 3) Deleted one of the label - one audit for LABEL_DELETE > 4) Deleted multiple labels simultaneously - one audit for LABEL_DELETE,with > multiple label names in Details > 5) deleled last label left - one audit for LABEL_DELETE > 6) Added one label and deleted two labels simultaneously -two audits, one > audit for LABEL_ADD and second for LABEL_DELETE ,with multiple label names in > Details > > > Thanks, > > Pinal Shah > >
