rest mgmt api

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



One of the goals for cuttlefish is to improvement manageability of the 
system.  This will invovle both cleaning up the CLI and adding a REST API 
to do everything the CLI current does.  There are a few implementation 
choices to make.

Currenty the 'ceph' tool has a bunch of code to send messages to the 
monitor and wait for replies.  This is 90% of what users currently can do.  
For the most part, the commands are interpreted by the monitor.  A small 
subset of commands (ceph tell ..., ceph pg <pgid> ...) will send commands 
directory to OSDs.


There are two main options for a REST endpoint that we've discussed so 
far:

1- Wrap the above in a clean library (probably integrating most of the 
code into Objecter/MonClient.. see wip-monc for a start on this).  Wrap 
libcephadmin in python and make a simple HTTP/REST front-end.  Users would 
deploy mgmt endpoints in addition to/alongside monitors and everything 
else.  If they want the rest api at all.

2- Embed a web server in the ceph-mon daemons, and push the current admin 
'client' functionality there.  Come up with some basic authentication so 
that this doesn't break the current security model.

Note that neither of these solves the HA issue directly; HTTP is a 
client/server protocol, so whoever is using the API can specify only one 
server endpoint.  If it is a monitor, they'll need to be prepare to fail 
over to another in their code, or set up a load balancer.  Same goes for 
the restful endpoint, if it fails.  The difference is that a single 
endpoint can proxy to whichever monitors are in quorum, so a much smaller 
set of errors (endpoint machine crash, buggy endpoint) affect availability 
of the API.


The somewhat orthogonal question is how to clean up the CLI usage, 
parsing, and get equivalence in the new REST API.  

One option is to create a basic framework in the monitor so that there is 
a table of api commands.  The 'parsing' would be regularized and validated 
in a generic way.  The rest endpoint would pass the URI through in a 
generic way (sanitized json?) that can be matched against the same table.

Another option is to support a single set of commands on the monitor side, 
and do the REST->CLI or CLI->REST or CLI,REST->json translation on the 
client side.  The command registry framework above would live in the CLI 
utility and REST endpoints instead (or libcephadmin).  This means that the 
monitor code is simpler, but also means that the libcephadmin or ceph tool 
and REST endpoint need to be running the latest code to be able to send 
the latest commands to the monitor.  It also means multiple places where 
the command set is defined (mon and endpoint and cli).

Either way there is a fair bit of refactoring, but it should be a net 
cleanup.  I'd like to get some consensus on how to proceed before we 
expend too much effort.  Ian scheduled a quick chat Friday, so let's get 
any other suggestions or ideas out before then so we can move forward...
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux