|
This is a File Change Log http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Change_Log
I agree with Chris that for auditing purposes, it might be sufficient to not persist this log. However, if we plan to use this File Change Log for backup and/or remote mirroring, then its constraints will have to be more stringent.
Agreed. This patch exposes a general audit logging API through the commons logging interface. All audit events are at INFO level. -1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12381725/3336-0.patch against trunk revision 654315. +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags. -1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings. +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. +1 core tests. The patch passed core unit tests. +1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests. Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2435/testReport/ This message is automatically generated. The current patch assumes that the first column is the ugi, the second column is the permissions, the third column is the command, etc,etc. We can make the format a wee-bit forward compatible if we have it of the form
"ugi=xxx\tperm=xxx\tcmd=xxx" Then, an application parsing this log output can determine whether the column it is looking for exists or not. I agree with Dhruba; calling toString on the UGI causes the logging to dig too deeply into unrelated code. The patch contains some scratch code that needs to be removed, too.
Nevermind; I misunderstood your original comment. This implements the change Dhruba was suggesting.
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12381915/3336-1.patch against trunk revision 655674. +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags. -1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings. +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. -1 core tests. The patch failed core unit tests. +1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests. Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2453/testReport/ This message is automatically generated. I talked with Allen, and he suggested that- particularly for creates- that the resulting owner, group, and permission be printed rather than only that which was supplied in the RPC.
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12382002/3336-2.patch against trunk revision 655984. +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags. -1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings. +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. +1 core tests. The patch passed core unit tests. +1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests. Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2458/testReport/ This message is automatically generated. Integrated in Hadoop-trunk #493 (See http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-trunk/493/
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thoughts? This isn't designed to be a secure audit log- and I'm sure issues like
HADOOP-1741will affect the approach to future audit logging- but it should provide sufficient information for administrators to manage HDFS.