[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-1300?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16522966#comment-16522966
 ] 

Don Bosco Durai commented on RANGER-1300:
-----------------------------------------

{quote} * Proxy (for Ceph/RadosGW at the moment): 
[https://github.com/bolkedebruin/s3gw]{quote}
Hi [~bolke], I looked into your code. Seems you have implemented Ranger policy 
evaluation in golang :) I had few questions.
 # Did you consider using JNI integration? I don't know much about GO, I saw 
few libraries like this [https://github.com/Centny/jnigo.] 
 # We had a similar requirement for Apache HAWQ, which is written in 'C'. We 
ended up using JNI to Ranger plugin written Java. There are multiple advantages 
of using JNI approach because the Ranger community has optimized the policy 
evaluation significantly, including using Trie indexing to grossly increase the 
performance. Also having one code base helps in keeping all platform in the 
same feature level, like supporting Tag Based Policies, custom enrichment, 
conditional policies, etc. Also integrating with Ranger Audit framework will be 
automatically supported if you use Java implementation
 # How is Ceph configured to use the Ranger plugin? I couldn't see the 
documentation for that. Is it just configuration or we need to recompile Ceph 
with your plugin?

> S3 support
> ----------
>
>                 Key: RANGER-1300
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-1300
>             Project: Ranger
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: plugins
>            Reporter: Jose
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: ranger-servicedef-aws-s3.json
>
>
> As more and more people are deploying hadoop into AWS and as S3 is used in 
> lots of application. It'd be nice to have S3 support built into Ranger.
> It's not a trivial task. Right now Ranger Storage support (only hdfs) runs 
> directly in the Namenode



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to