---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62791/#review187216
---
I have some minor comments. Please addreses them. Other than
Sergio - what is the state of HMS notifications in Hive1? Do they even
exist there?
Kalyan - I am not sure that the new Sentry architecture which is based on
HMS notifications can work with Hive 1 at all.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Kalyan Kumar Kalvagadda <
kkal...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
The major reason why we wanted to move to Sentry 2.0 was the dependency on
Hive version. Sentry HA completely relies on HMS notifications which are
not available in Hive 1, more over it relies on fixes that are only
available in Hive 2.4. Sentry 1 should work with Hive 1, so we can't make
Sentry
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62791/
---
Review request for sentry.
Bugs: SENTRY-1974
OK I can add a switch to call the validation code for the shell only. Do
you know why the CommandUtil includes:
tSentryPrivilege.setAction(AccessConstants.ALL);
for the URI case? This looks a bit dodgy to me as it would override the
value parsed via PRIVILEGE_ACTION_NAME.
Colm.
On Wed, Oct 4,
Fine with me, it makes sense to get the HA work out there if it is ready to
be used. What kind of time-line are you thinking of for 1.9.0?
Colm.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:37 AM, Sergio Pena
wrote:
> It sounds good to do. One of the reasons to do sentry 2.0 was the
>
I joined the slack team. There's an official "ASF" slack team with rooms
for various projects, it might be better to move it there long-term.
Colm.
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Alexander Kolbasov
wrote:
> I don’t want to make it too official yet - this is experimental