[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-9242?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17010913#comment-17010913
]
Vihang Karajgaonkar commented on IMPALA-9242:
---------------------------------------------
Thanks [~csringhofer] for taking this up. I have a couple of questions on your
comment above:
{quote}1. Create a separate cache with efficient look up by authorizable,
possible by simply reusing TreePrivilegeCache from Sentry. This cache would
need to be recreated whenever the user's/role's privileges change. This seems
an easy solution + it would not affect Ranger, but would likely ~double the
memory consumption of privileges.{quote}
I agree that {{TreePrivilegeCache}} is not generic enough to be used directly
in Impala. I had raised these concerns in the review (specifically to support
add/remove privileges to the cache so that this can be long-living cache) but
unfortunately, it couldn't be implemented that way. I that SENTRY-2539 is
designed specifically with Hive in mind since it loads all the user privileges
in the beginning everytime before doing the privilege check which I think is
not very efficient in the first place. However, I did not understand why using
{{TreePrivilegeCache}} directly would double the memory? Is it because you will
still need to store them separately for each individual user/role?
May be we can have a hierarchical cache instead of {{CatalogObjectCache}} in
{{Principal}} class here
https://github.com/apache/impala/blob/master/fe/src/main/java/org/apache/impala/catalog/Principal.java#L43.
If {{TreePrivilegeCache}} cannot be used directory, may be we can extend it? I
am not sure if its worth extending it since that way we have better control on
the cache implementation.
{quote}
2. Change AuthorizationPolicy (
https://github.com/apache/impala/blob/master/fe/src/main/java/org/apache/impala/catalog/PrincipalPrivilege.java
) to store Privileges in a "more treelike manner" to allow efficient look up
by authorizable. This is a more complex change and could affect Ranger too.
{quote}
I am not very familiar with Ranger implementation. Do we cache privileges for
Ranger too?
> Access check should only check against the privileges of the authorizable
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IMPALA-9242
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-9242
> Project: IMPALA
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Vihang Karajgaonkar
> Assignee: Csaba Ringhofer
> Priority: Major
>
> Currently, according to the implementation of
> https://github.com/apache/sentry/blob/branch-2.1.0/sentry-provider/sentry-provider-cache/src/main/java/org/apache/sentry/provider/cache/SimpleCacheProviderBackend.java#L64
> each access check request in Sentry is done against all the privileges of the
> user. Instead, we can reduce the number of privilege checks significantly, if
> we use this API in
> https://github.com/apache/sentry/blob/master/sentry-provider/sentry-provider-cache/src/main/java/org/apache/sentry/provider/cache/PrivilegeCache.java#L46
> Unfortunately, SENTRY-1291 which is merged in master branch of Sentry is
> unavailable. However, if we can have a interface side changes in
> PrivilegeCache, Impala can implement a prefix-tree based {{PrivilegeCache}}
> so that number of privileges returned are only related to the given
> authorizable. This API can then be used in SimpleCacheProviderBackend to
> reduce the processing time required to check access for a large number of
> objects in large setups.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-all-unsubscr...@impala.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-all-h...@impala.apache.org
