Hi Yehuda, thanks, that resolved a lot of questions for me. A few follow-up comments below: On 06/12/12 18:47, Yehuda Sadeh wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Florian Haas <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I have a long flight ahead of me later this week and plan to be >> spending some time on http://ceph.com/docs/master/ops/radosgw/ -- which >> currently happens to be a bit, ahem, sparse. >> >> There's currently not a lot of documentation on radosgw, and some of it >> is inconsistent, so if one of the devs could answer the following >> questions, I can put them in a more comprehensive document that should >> make radosgw easier to set up and run. >> >> 1. Apache rewrite rule >> >> Is the Apache configuration example listed in the man page correct and >> authoritative? Specifically, it seems unclear to me whether the >> rewrite engine rule: >> >> (RewriteRule ^/([a-zA-Z0-9-_.]*)([/]?.*) >> /s3gw.fcgi?page=$1¶ms=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} > > We currently use a slightly different rule: > > RewriteRule ^/(.*) > /radosgw.fcgi?params=$1&%{QUERY_STRING} > [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L] Could you explain what happened to "page"? >> [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L]) >> >> ... is expected to work only for compatibility with S3 clients, or >> whether this rewrite rule is also for Swift clients. > > Not really needed for Swift. It's required for passing in the > HTTP_AUTHORIZATION env, however, Swift uses a different field which is > not filtered out by apache. OK. >> 2. FastCGI wrapper >> >> The radosgw man page says it should be "exec /usr/bin/radosgw -c >> /etc/ceph/ceph.conf -n client.radosgw.gateway", whereas the Wiki >> (http://ceph.com/wiki/RADOS_Gateway) omits the -n option. I didn't get >> it to work without the -n option, so is it safe to say that it is required? > > -n is required for specifying the ceph user that the gateway would > use. Without it it'd use client.admin is the default. OK. >> 3. Apache/radosgw daemon/FastCGI wrapper interaction >> >> Is it safe to say that we always need all three of these? The man page indicates >> so, the Wiki makes no mention of the daemon started by the init script. > > The wrapper is not needed if not using apache for spawning the radosgw > processes. E.g., when using the FastCgiExternalServer param: > > FastCgiExternalServer /var/www/radosgw.fcgi -socket > /var/run/ceph/radosgw.client.radosgw > >> 4. FastCGI configuration directives >> >> The man page mentions: >> FastCgiExternalServer /var/www/s3gw.fcgi -socket /tmp/radosgw.sock >> >> The Wiki says: >> FastCgiWrapper /var/www/s3gw.fcgi >> FastCgiServer /usr/bin/radosgw >> >> https://github.com/ceph/teuthology/blob/master/teuthology/task/apache.conf >> (which was mentioned as an additional reference on IRC at some point) says: >> FastCgiIPCDir /tmp/cephtest/apache/tmp/fastcgi_sock >> FastCgiExternalServer /tmp/cephtest/apache/htdocs/rgw.fcgi -socket rgw_sock >> >> Which of these is required/preferred? -socket option or not? Wrapper, >> Server or ExternalServer? IPCDir? >> > > Either one is required. We prefer using the external server option. We > found out that letting apache (or the fastcgi process manager) > managing was sub-optimal and was introducing high latencies. OK, I'm sticking to FastCgiExternalServer then. >> 5. Logging >> >> What's the preferred way of adding debug logging for radosgw? >> >> https://github.com/ceph/teuthology/blob/master/teuthology/task/apache.conf >> mentions: >> >> SetEnv RGW_LOG_LEVEL 20 >> SetEnv RGW_PRINT_CONTINUE yes >> SetEnv RGW_SHOULD_LOG yes > > All are obsolete and defunct, and have a corresponding ceph.conf conf: > > debug rgw = 20 > rgw print continue = true > rgw should log = true > > the latter will be replaced soon by: > > rgw enable usage log = true > > Note that only the 'debug rgw' option is really related to debug logs. > The 'rgw print continue' option is a badly named option to control the > use of 100-continue (should the radosgw 'print' -- as in FCGX_FPrintF > -- the 100-continue when it should?). This can only work with a > modified mod_fastcgi that supports that. > The 'rgw should log' option sets whether we log each user operation to > the dedicated pool (so that it can be analyzed later on for billing, > etc.) Yep. I was really only looking for what "debug rgw" does, and got confused by the FastCGI envars. >> ... but it's unclear to me whether this is still current (I found no >> trace of those envars in the source, but maybe I was looking in the >> wrong place). >> >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/452b1248a68f743ad55641722da80e3fd5ad2ae9 >> touched the "debug rgw" option. If that is the preferred way of doing >> things now, where should you set this? In ceph.conf, in the >> [client.radosgw.<name>] section? > > Either under the global section, or [client], or > [client.radosgw.<name>]. Depends on how you organize your conf. OK. >> Also, for each of these, where would the logging output end up? >> /var/log/ceph? Apache error log? If so, only if the Apache LogLevel is >> more verbose than info? Syslog? > > > The debug log would end up wherever you specified in the 'log file' > config option. ... or syslog, if log file = "" and syslog = true. (iirc) >> 6. Swift API: Keys >> >> Is it correct to assume that for any Swift client to work, we must set a >> Swift key for the user, like so? >> >> radosgw-admin key create --key-type=swift --uid=<user> >> >> If so, is the secret_key that that creates for the user: >> >> "swift_keys": [ >> { "user": "<user>", >> "secret_key": "<longbase64hash>"}]} >> >> >> ... the same key that the swift command line client expects to be set >> with th -K option? > > Yes. OK, but I realized that you apparently have to create a separate key when creating a sub-user. Is that correct? Or is there a way for sub-users to "inherit" the keys defined for their parent user? >> 7. Swift API: swift user name >> >> When we call "swift -U <user>", is that the verbatim user_id that we've >> defined with "radosgw-admin user create --uid=<user_id>"? Or do we need >> to set a prefix? Or define a separate Swift user ID? >> > > In swift the terminology is a bit different. There is the account and > under that there is the user. Since we already have a 'user' (which is > actually the swift account), we created a 'subuser'. So a one liner > user and swift-subuser creation would be as follows: > > # radosgw-admin user create --subuser=yehuda:yehuda1 > --display-name=Yehuda --key-type=swift --access=full It seems there is some magic involved so that if you do "user create", set --subuser=<prefix>:<sub> and don't set --uid, it creates a new parent user named <prefix>. Is this meant to be stable? Or is the supported way of doing things to always first create a user, and then use "subuser create" to create the subuser? > { "user_id": "yehuda", > "rados_uid": 0, > "display_name": "Yehuda", > "email": "", > "suspended": 0, > "max_buckets": 1000, > "subusers": [ > { "id": "yehuda:yehuda1", > "permissions": "full-control"}], > "keys": [], > "swift_keys": [ > { "user": "yehuda:yehuda1", > "secret_key": "7TD5f2QrwxkCnhthwowC4d9uEJ4mnX8nGsXjmnW8"}]} > > The --access=full will give the subuser a full access to the account; > other options would be read, write, readwrite. OK. >> 8. Swift API: authentication version >> >> When radosgw acts as the auth server for a Swift request, is it correct >> to say that only v1.0 Swift authentication is supported, not v2.0? > > Yeah. Currently radosgw serves as v1.0 authenticator. So I figured. >> 9. Swift API: authentication URL >> >> What's the correct Swift authentication URL for "swift -A <url>"? It >> seems like it's "http://<rgw hostname>:<port>/auth", but confirmation >> would help. > > Confirmed. Thanks. >> 10. radosgw "OpenStack user" information >> >> From the radosgw-admin man page: >> --os-user=group:name >> The OpenStack user (only needed for use with OpenStack) >> --os-secret=key >> The OpenStack key > > Obsolete. That was the old way to configure swift users. OK. Should this be removed from the man page then? >> What's this meant to be used for? Keystone authentication? If so, is >> there anything else that needs to be done for Keystone to work with >> this, such as add an endpoint URI? > > iirc, the swift protocol provides the endpoint URI in the HTTP header, > so if the token was generated by another swift authenticator, we'd try > to authenticate against it. I'm not familiar with keystone, and > whether it's supposed to work with it. OK. >> Please feel free to point me to existing documentation where it >> exists. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks! >> > > That's my radosgw ceph.conf that I'm using in my test environment. > > [client] > admin socket = /tmp/radosgw.adsock > debug ms = 1 > rgw socket path = /tmp/.radosgw.sock > auth supported = none Silly question: If "auth supported = none", is it still required to run the ceph-authtool and ceph-auth commands specified in radosgw(8)? > log file = /var/log/radosgw/radosgw.log > debug rgw = 20 > rgw cache enabled = 1 > ; rgw swift url = http://skinny > ; rgw swift url prefix = swift I ran across this option sifting through src/rgw, can you explain what the URL prefix is used for? > rgw dns name = skinny > rgw cache lru size = 1000 > rgw enable ops log = false > ; rgw print continue = false > > [mon.a] > host = swab > mon addr = 192.168.106.223:14090 > > That's my apache site conf: > > FastCgiExternalServer /var/www/web1/web/radosgw.fcgi -socket /tmp/.radosgw.sock > > <VirtualHost *:80> > ServerName skinny.ops.newdream.net > ServerAlias skinny > ServerAdmin webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxx > DocumentRoot /var/www/web1/web/ > > #turn engine on > RewriteEngine On > > #following is important for S3/rados > RewriteRule ^/(.*) > /radosgw.fcgi?params=$1&%{QUERY_STRING} > [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L] > > <IfModule mod_fastcgi.c> > SuexecUserGroup web1 web1 > # PHP_Fix_Pathinfo_Enable 1 > <Directory /var/www/web1/web/> > Options +ExecCGI > AllowOverride None > SetHandler fastcgi-script > Order allow,deny > Allow from all > AuthBasicAuthoritative Off > </Directory> > </IfModule> > > AllowEncodedSlashes On > > ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/error.log > CustomLog /var/log/apache2/access.log combined > ServerSignature Off > > # DumpIOInput On > # DumpIOOutput On > > </VirtualHost> Thanks for your insight so far. I take that as a "WTFM". :) Cheers, Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
