Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-23 Thread larry mccay 
I think that there is room for both.
We need to define the usecases that need to be served.

I can see:

1. global gateway resources served by multiple webapps/topologies -
especially for in the very least for branding resources, etc
2. topology/webapp specific resources served only be individual apps
3. topology/webapps that need resources from both - if this is possible


On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Zachary Blanco <zbla...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> I like the idea! It's definitely something that's required if we're to
> serve these HTML/JS/CSS files.
>
> Are you thinking that these files will be topology specific? Or does the
> solution in your mind have the files served at the "knox-level". i.e. not
> topology specific? I'm thinking that they could just be served after the
> 'gateway.path', such as (https://host:port/gatewaypath/file.html).
>
> 
> From: larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:43 AM
> To: dev@knox.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox
>
> Hi Zac -
>
> I've taken a quick look at your POC.
>
> You've run into the same thing that I have in that you had to specifically
> code the access to the html and js files from a resources directory.
> We need to open up the ability for Knox to let jetty serve those resources
> just as any web app which will let jetty do what it does well, allow for
> arbitrary pages, css, javscript, etc.
>
> I do think this is a great start and something that we can work with as a
> POC to figure out the best UI experience.
>
> Let's file a JIRA to allow arbitrary files be served by the hosting
> appserver and the ability to configure the files directory for those files.
>
> thanks,
>
> --larry
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Zac Blanco <zacdbla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Balaji, in response your first first question about what this could
> provide
> > over Ambari. I think that Larry made a good point about not always using
> > Ambari. This could also make the ease of creating/updating/testing
> > topologies much easier. Something that Ambari would not be able to
> provide.
> > Because the admin API is already in place this UI can easily utilize the
> > API to do these updates by making simple POST/PUT/DELETE requests with
> > requests directly from the browser.
> >
> > I also think that we could turn this into an Ambari iframe view and make
> it
> > appear as a "quick link" in Ambari. I know a few of the other services
> have
> > their own UI which can be reached from the Ambari configs too.
> >
> > Originally, I intended for this to be something that admins would be able
> > use. It could just make setup/testing/updating the topologies in Knox
> much
> > smoother. The way this POC is currently implemented requires that at
> least
> > one topology is deployed with the admin service. To be able to reach the
> UI
> > you need to provide the admin credentials.
> >
> > I think on top of the testing tools that I had previously implemented it
> > could make working with Knox (Ambari or not) much easier.
> >
> > However I think if we had something like swagger <http://swagger.io>for
> > services as well could potentially be very useful or interesting too
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:35 PM larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I imagine that there will be functionality for both Administrators and
> > API
> > > consumers.
> > > Administrative functionality would be protected with with appropriate
> > > authorization just as the admin API is today.
> > >
> > > How the functionality for different user classes is separated would
> need
> > to
> > > be discussed and designed appropriately.
> > > This is still in a POC stage.
> > >
> > > If you have specific suggestions please feel free to provide them.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Balaji Ganesan <bgane...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
> > > > question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting
> to
> > > end
> > > > using APIs that are routed through Knox?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Balaji -
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Not all shops use Ambar

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-23 Thread Zachary Blanco 
I like the idea! It's definitely something that's required if we're to serve 
these HTML/JS/CSS files.

Are you thinking that these files will be topology specific? Or does the 
solution in your mind have the files served at the "knox-level". i.e. not 
topology specific? I'm thinking that they could just be served after the  
'gateway.path', such as (https://host:port/gatewaypath/file.html).


From: larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:43 AM
To: dev@knox.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

Hi Zac -

I've taken a quick look at your POC.

You've run into the same thing that I have in that you had to specifically
code the access to the html and js files from a resources directory.
We need to open up the ability for Knox to let jetty serve those resources
just as any web app which will let jetty do what it does well, allow for
arbitrary pages, css, javscript, etc.

I do think this is a great start and something that we can work with as a
POC to figure out the best UI experience.

Let's file a JIRA to allow arbitrary files be served by the hosting
appserver and the ability to configure the files directory for those files.

thanks,

--larry



On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Zac Blanco <zacdbla...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Balaji, in response your first first question about what this could provide
> over Ambari. I think that Larry made a good point about not always using
> Ambari. This could also make the ease of creating/updating/testing
> topologies much easier. Something that Ambari would not be able to provide.
> Because the admin API is already in place this UI can easily utilize the
> API to do these updates by making simple POST/PUT/DELETE requests with
> requests directly from the browser.
>
> I also think that we could turn this into an Ambari iframe view and make it
> appear as a "quick link" in Ambari. I know a few of the other services have
> their own UI which can be reached from the Ambari configs too.
>
> Originally, I intended for this to be something that admins would be able
> use. It could just make setup/testing/updating the topologies in Knox much
> smoother. The way this POC is currently implemented requires that at least
> one topology is deployed with the admin service. To be able to reach the UI
> you need to provide the admin credentials.
>
> I think on top of the testing tools that I had previously implemented it
> could make working with Knox (Ambari or not) much easier.
>
> However I think if we had something like swagger <http://swagger.io>for
> services as well could potentially be very useful or interesting too
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:35 PM larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I imagine that there will be functionality for both Administrators and
> API
> > consumers.
> > Administrative functionality would be protected with with appropriate
> > authorization just as the admin API is today.
> >
> > How the functionality for different user classes is separated would need
> to
> > be discussed and designed appropriately.
> > This is still in a POC stage.
> >
> > If you have specific suggestions please feel free to provide them.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Balaji Ganesan <bgane...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
> > > question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting to
> > end
> > > using APIs that are routed through Knox?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Balaji -
> > > >
> > > > 1. Not all shops use Ambari
> > > > 2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view
> for
> > > > shops that do use it
> > > >
> > > > --larry
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan <
> > > > balaji.ganesa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox
> > > > service
> > > > > in Apache Ambari?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay <
> larry.mc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to this idea!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > > > > > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-23 Thread larry mccay 
Hi Zac -

I've taken a quick look at your POC.

You've run into the same thing that I have in that you had to specifically
code the access to the html and js files from a resources directory.
We need to open up the ability for Knox to let jetty serve those resources
just as any web app which will let jetty do what it does well, allow for
arbitrary pages, css, javscript, etc.

I do think this is a great start and something that we can work with as a
POC to figure out the best UI experience.

Let's file a JIRA to allow arbitrary files be served by the hosting
appserver and the ability to configure the files directory for those files.

thanks,

--larry



On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Zac Blanco  wrote:

> Balaji, in response your first first question about what this could provide
> over Ambari. I think that Larry made a good point about not always using
> Ambari. This could also make the ease of creating/updating/testing
> topologies much easier. Something that Ambari would not be able to provide.
> Because the admin API is already in place this UI can easily utilize the
> API to do these updates by making simple POST/PUT/DELETE requests with
> requests directly from the browser.
>
> I also think that we could turn this into an Ambari iframe view and make it
> appear as a "quick link" in Ambari. I know a few of the other services have
> their own UI which can be reached from the Ambari configs too.
>
> Originally, I intended for this to be something that admins would be able
> use. It could just make setup/testing/updating the topologies in Knox much
> smoother. The way this POC is currently implemented requires that at least
> one topology is deployed with the admin service. To be able to reach the UI
> you need to provide the admin credentials.
>
> I think on top of the testing tools that I had previously implemented it
> could make working with Knox (Ambari or not) much easier.
>
> However I think if we had something like swagger for
> services as well could potentially be very useful or interesting too
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:35 PM larry mccay  wrote:
>
> > I imagine that there will be functionality for both Administrators and
> API
> > consumers.
> > Administrative functionality would be protected with with appropriate
> > authorization just as the admin API is today.
> >
> > How the functionality for different user classes is separated would need
> to
> > be discussed and designed appropriately.
> > This is still in a POC stage.
> >
> > If you have specific suggestions please feel free to provide them.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Balaji Ganesan 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
> > > question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting to
> > end
> > > using APIs that are routed through Knox?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Balaji -
> > > >
> > > > 1. Not all shops use Ambari
> > > > 2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view
> for
> > > > shops that do use it
> > > >
> > > > --larry
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan <
> > > > balaji.ganesa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox
> > > > service
> > > > > in Apache Ambari?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay <
> larry.mc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to this idea!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > > > > > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> > > > > > We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in
> the
> > > > > topology
> > > > > > too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we
> > > > proxy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it
> > > would
> > > > > need
> > > > > > to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> > > > > > Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the
> > code
> > > > is
> > > > > > making the context assumptions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> > > > > > kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey Zac,
> > > > > > > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we
> > might
> > > > > want
> > > > > > > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in
> > > Ambari
> > > > > > > however.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On a technical level should this be something that ends up
> being
> > > part
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > > > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread Balaji Ganesan 
Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting to end
using APIs that are routed through Knox?

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay  wrote:

> Balaji -
>
> 1. Not all shops use Ambari
> 2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view for
> shops that do use it
>
> --larry
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan <
> balaji.ganesa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox
> service
> > in Apache Ambari?
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to this idea!
> > >
> > > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> > > We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the
> > topology
> > > too.
> > >
> > > Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we
> proxy.
> > >
> > > It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it would
> > need
> > > to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> > > Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the code
> is
> > > making the context assumptions.
> > >
> > > I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> > > kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey Zac,
> > > > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might
> > want
> > > > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in Ambari
> > > > however.
> > > >
> > > > On a technical level should this be something that ends up being part
> > of
> > > > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > > > http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kevin.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Hi everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI
> that
> > > > >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see
> if
> > > this
> > > > >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> > > > >
> > > > >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make calls
> > to
> > > > >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It
> > could
> > > > >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> > > > >
> > > > >I started working on something at
> > > > >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > > > > . I added a new resource under
> > the
> > > > >*gateway-service-admin* module:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API then
> > the
> > > > >resource should be available under http://host:port
> > > > /gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
> > > > >Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or less
> > > just a
> > > > >proof-of-concept for now.
> > > > >
> > > > >I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can send
> > > > "test"
> > > > >requests to different services to test whether they are working or
> > not.
> > > > >
> > > > >If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how we
> > > might
> > > > >integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a
> > > > thought.
> > > > >
> > > > >I would love to know what everyone thinks!
> > > > >
> > > > >-Zac
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread larry mccay 
I imagine that there will be functionality for both Administrators and API
consumers.
Administrative functionality would be protected with with appropriate
authorization just as the admin API is today.

How the functionality for different user classes is separated would need to
be discussed and designed appropriately.
This is still in a POC stage.

If you have specific suggestions please feel free to provide them.


On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Balaji Ganesan  wrote:

> Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
> question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting to end
> using APIs that are routed through Knox?
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay 
> wrote:
>
> > Balaji -
> >
> > 1. Not all shops use Ambari
> > 2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view for
> > shops that do use it
> >
> > --larry
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan <
> > balaji.ganesa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox
> > service
> > > in Apache Ambari?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 to this idea!
> > > >
> > > > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > > > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> > > > We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the
> > > topology
> > > > too.
> > > >
> > > > Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we
> > proxy.
> > > >
> > > > It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it
> would
> > > need
> > > > to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> > > > Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the code
> > is
> > > > making the context assumptions.
> > > >
> > > > I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> > > > kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey Zac,
> > > > > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might
> > > want
> > > > > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in
> Ambari
> > > > > however.
> > > > >
> > > > > On a technical level should this be something that ends up being
> part
> > > of
> > > > > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > > > > http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Kevin.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI
> > that
> > > > > >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see
> > if
> > > > this
> > > > > >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make
> calls
> > > to
> > > > > >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It
> > > could
> > > > > >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I started working on something at
> > > > > >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > > > > > . I added a new resource
> under
> > > the
> > > > > >*gateway-service-admin* module:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API
> then
> > > the
> > > > > >resource should be available under http://host:port
> > > > > /gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
> > > > > >Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or
> less
> > > > just a
> > > > > >proof-of-concept for now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can
> send
> > > > > "test"
> > > > > >requests to different services to test whether they are working or
> > > not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how
> we
> > > > might
> > > > > >integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a
> > > > > thought.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I would love to know what everyone thinks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >-Zac
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread Zac Blanco 
Balaji, in response your first first question about what this could provide
over Ambari. I think that Larry made a good point about not always using
Ambari. This could also make the ease of creating/updating/testing
topologies much easier. Something that Ambari would not be able to provide.
Because the admin API is already in place this UI can easily utilize the
API to do these updates by making simple POST/PUT/DELETE requests with
requests directly from the browser.

I also think that we could turn this into an Ambari iframe view and make it
appear as a "quick link" in Ambari. I know a few of the other services have
their own UI which can be reached from the Ambari configs too.

Originally, I intended for this to be something that admins would be able
use. It could just make setup/testing/updating the topologies in Knox much
smoother. The way this POC is currently implemented requires that at least
one topology is deployed with the admin service. To be able to reach the UI
you need to provide the admin credentials.

I think on top of the testing tools that I had previously implemented it
could make working with Knox (Ambari or not) much easier.

However I think if we had something like swagger for
services as well could potentially be very useful or interesting too



On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:35 PM larry mccay  wrote:

> I imagine that there will be functionality for both Administrators and API
> consumers.
> Administrative functionality would be protected with with appropriate
> authorization just as the admin API is today.
>
> How the functionality for different user classes is separated would need to
> be discussed and designed appropriately.
> This is still in a POC stage.
>
> If you have specific suggestions please feel free to provide them.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Balaji Ganesan 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Larry. Agree all shops do not use Ambari. Back to my original
> > question, are we targeting this UI at administrators or we targeting to
> end
> > using APIs that are routed through Knox?
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:06 PM, larry mccay 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Balaji -
> > >
> > > 1. Not all shops use Ambari
> > > 2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view for
> > > shops that do use it
> > >
> > > --larry
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan <
> > > balaji.ganesa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox
> > > service
> > > > in Apache Ambari?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to this idea!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > > > > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> > > > > We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the
> > > > topology
> > > > > too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we
> > > proxy.
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it
> > would
> > > > need
> > > > > to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> > > > > Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the
> code
> > > is
> > > > > making the context assumptions.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> > > > > kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey Zac,
> > > > > > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we
> might
> > > > want
> > > > > > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in
> > Ambari
> > > > > > however.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On a technical level should this be something that ends up being
> > part
> > > > of
> > > > > > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > > > > > http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kevin.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Hi everyone,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI
> > > that
> > > > > > >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and
> see
> > > if
> > > > > this
> > > > > > >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make
> > calls
> > > > to
> > > > > > >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies.
> It
> > > > could
> > > > > > >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I started working on something at
> > > > > > >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > > > > > > . I added a

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread larry mccay 
Balaji -

1. Not all shops use Ambari
2. We can keep an eye on enabling this to bootstrap an Ambari view for
shops that do use it

--larry

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Balaji Ganesan 
wrote:

> What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox service
> in Apache Ambari?
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to this idea!
> >
> > I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> > I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> > We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the
> topology
> > too.
> >
> > Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we proxy.
> >
> > It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it would
> need
> > to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> > Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the code is
> > making the context assumptions.
> >
> > I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> > kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Zac,
> > > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might
> want
> > > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in Ambari
> > > however.
> > >
> > > On a technical level should this be something that ends up being part
> of
> > > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > > http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
> > >
> > >
> > > Kevin.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI that
> > > >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see if
> > this
> > > >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> > > >
> > > >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make calls
> to
> > > >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It
> could
> > > >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> > > >
> > > >I started working on something at
> > > >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > > > . I added a new resource under
> the
> > > >*gateway-service-admin* module:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API then
> the
> > > >resource should be available under http://host:port
> > > /gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
> > > >Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or less
> > just a
> > > >proof-of-concept for now.
> > > >
> > > >I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can send
> > > "test"
> > > >requests to different services to test whether they are working or
> not.
> > > >
> > > >If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how we
> > might
> > > >integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a
> > > thought.
> > > >
> > > >I would love to know what everyone thinks!
> > > >
> > > >-Zac
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread larry mccay 
+1 to this idea!

I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the topology
too.

Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we proxy.

It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it would need
to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the code is
making the context assumptions.

I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder 
wrote:

> Hey Zac,
> This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might want
> to balance investment here against what we might want to do in Ambari
> however.
>
> On a technical level should this be something that ends up being part of
> each topology or part of the admin topology
> http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
>
>
> Kevin.
>
>
>
>
> On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
>
> >Hi everyone,
> >
> >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI that
> >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see if this
> >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> >
> >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make calls to
> >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It could
> >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> >
> >I started working on something at
> >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > . I added a new resource under the
> >*gateway-service-admin* module:
> >
> https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
> >
> >
> >As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API then the
> >resource should be available under http://host:port
> /gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
> >Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or less just a
> >proof-of-concept for now.
> >
> >I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can send
> "test"
> >requests to different services to test whether they are working or not.
> >
> >If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how we might
> >integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a
> thought.
> >
> >I would love to know what everyone thinks!
> >
> >-Zac
>

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread Balaji Ganesan 
What is the use case for this UI ? What cannot this be done in Knox service
in Apache Ambari?

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:38 PM, larry mccay  wrote:

> +1 to this idea!
>
> I have a couple interesting things to hang off of it as well.
> I've got a POC for a KnoXplorer - simple UI for viewing WebHDFS.
> We can provide a simple REST API test page for each service in the topology
> too.
>
> Also, I would love to expose Swagger or WADL for the APIs that we proxy.
>
> It seems that if we are to drive this from the admin API that it would need
> to span topologies though - not be under each topology.
> Since you already have it working, I will take a look at how the code is
> making the context assumptions.
>
> I'll try and spend some time looking at it tonight!
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Minder <
> kevin.min...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Zac,
> > This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might want
> > to balance investment here against what we might want to do in Ambari
> > however.
> >
> > On a technical level should this be something that ends up being part of
> > each topology or part of the admin topology
> > http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui
> >
> >
> > Kevin.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:
> >
> > >Hi everyone,
> > >
> > >I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI that
> > >someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see if
> this
> > >would be a feature that would be welcomed.
> > >
> > >I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make calls to
> > >Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It could
> > >then display information about the topologies to the user.
> > >
> > >I started working on something at
> > >https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> > > . I added a new resource under the
> > >*gateway-service-admin* module:
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
> > >
> > >
> > >As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API then the
> > >resource should be available under http://host:port
> > /gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
> > >Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or less
> just a
> > >proof-of-concept for now.
> > >
> > >I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can send
> > "test"
> > >requests to different services to test whether they are working or not.
> > >
> > >If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how we
> might
> > >integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a
> > thought.
> > >
> > >I would love to know what everyone thinks!
> > >
> > >-Zac
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] An Administrator UI for Knox

2015-12-18 Thread Kevin Minder 
Hey Zac,
This has long been on my “wish list”.  I struggle with how we might want to 
balance investment here against what we might want to do in Ambari however.  

On a technical level should this be something that ends up being part of each 
topology or part of the admin topology
http://host:port/gateway/admin/ui


Kevin.




On 12/18/15, 4:11 PM, "Zac Blanco"  wrote:

>Hi everyone,
>
>I've been thinking recently about the possibility of adding a UI that
>someone could access using the admin API. I wanted discuss and see if this
>would be a feature that would be welcomed.
>
>I'm thinking that this UI could utilize AJAX requests and make calls to
>Knox's Admin API to gain information about deployed topologies. It could
>then display information about the topologies to the user.
>
>I started working on something at
>https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui
> . I added a new resource under the
>*gateway-service-admin* module:
>https://github.com/ZacBlanco/knox/tree/knox-admin-ui/gateway-service-admin/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/gateway/service/admin/ui
>
>
>As long as the user has a deployed topology with the Admin API then the
>resource should be available under http://host:port/gateway/{topology}/ui/home.
>Obviously the name/location could change. This is just more or less just a
>proof-of-concept for now.
>
>I was thinking that there could also be a feature where you can send "test"
>requests to different services to test whether they are working or not.
>
>If we do want to add this feature we should also think about how we might
>integrate testing for this with our current infrastructure. Just a thought.
>
>I would love to know what everyone thinks!
>
>-Zac