[openstack-dev] [all] cross project communication: Return request-id to caller

Miguel Ángel Ajo majopela at redhat.com
Wed Jun 3 10:13:15 UTC 2015 

Doesn’t this overlap with the work done for the OSProfiler ?  


More comments inline.  

Miguel Ángel Ajo


On Wednesday, 3 de June de 2015 at 11:43, Kekane, Abhishek wrote:

> Hi Devs,
>  
> So for I have got following responses on the proposed solutions:
>  
> Solution 1: Return tuple containing headers and body from - 3 +1
> Solution 2: Use thread local storage to store 'x-openstack-request-id' returned from headers - 0 +1
> Solution 3: Unique request-id across OpenStack Services - 1 +1
>  
>  


I’d vote for Solution 3, without involving keystone (first caller with no req-id generates one randomly),
the req-id contains a call/hop count, which is incremented on every new call...  
>   
>  
>  

>  
> Requesting community people, cross-project members and PTL's to go through this mailing thread [1] and give your suggestions/opinions about the solutions proposed so that It will be easy to finalize the solution.
>  
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/064842.html
>  
> Thanks & Regards,
>  
> Abhishek Kekane
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nikhil Komawar [mailto:nik.komawar at gmail.com]  
> Sent: 28 May 2015 12:34
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org (mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] cross project communication: Return request-id to caller
>  
> Did you get to talk with anyone in the LogWG ( https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LogWorkingGroup )? In wonder what kind of recommendations, standards we can come up with while adopting a cross project solution. If our logs follow certain prefix and or suffix style across projects, that would help a long way.
>  
> Personally: +1 on Solution 1
>  
> On 5/28/15 2:14 AM, Kekane, Abhishek wrote:
> >  
> > Hi Devs,
> >  
> >  
> > Thank you for your opinions/thoughts.
> >  
> > However I would like to suggest that please give +1 against the  
> > solution which you will like to propose so that at the end it will be  
> > helpful for us to consolidate the voting against each solution and  
> > make some decision.
> >  
> >  
> > Thanks in advance.
> >  
> >  
> > Abhishek Kekane
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > *From:*Joe Gordon [mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* 28 May 2015 00:31
> > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all] cross project communication:
> > Return request-id to caller
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Kekane, Abhishek  
> > <Abhishek.Kekane at nttdata.com <mailto:Abhishek.Kekane at nttdata.com>> wrote:
> >  
> > Hi Devs,
> >  
> >  
> > Each OpenStack service sends a request ID header with HTTP responses.
> > This request ID can be useful for tracking down problems in the logs.
> > However, when operation crosses service boundaries, this tracking can  
> > become difficult, as each service has its own request ID. Request ID  
> > is not returned to the caller, so it is not easy to track the request.
> > This becomes especially problematic when requests are coming in  
> > parallel. For example, glance will call cinder for creating image, but  
> > that cinder instance may be handling several other requests at the  
> > same time. By using same request ID in the log, user can easily find  
> > the cinder request ID that is same as glance request ID in the g-api  
> > log. It will help operators/developers to analyse logs effectively.
> >  
> >  
> > Thank you for writing this up.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > To address this issue we have come up with following solutions:
> >  
> >  
> > Solution 1: Return tuple containing headers and body from
> > respective clients (also favoured by Joe Gordon)
> >  
> > Reference:
> >  
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156508/6/specs/log-request-id-mapping
> > s.rst
> >  
> >  
> > Pros:
> >  
> > 1. Maintains backward compatibility
> >  
> > 2. Effective debugging/analysing of the problem as both calling
> > service request-id and called service request-id are logged in
> > same log message
> >  
> > 3. Build a full call graph
> >  
> > 4. End user will able to know the request-id of the request and
> > can approach service provider to know the cause of failure of
> > particular request.
> >  
> >  
> > Cons:
> >  
> > 1. The changes need to be done first in cross-projects before
> > making changes in clients
> >  
> > 2. Applications which are using python-*clients needs to do
> > required changes (check return type of response)
> >  
> >  
> > Additional cons:
> >  
> >  
> > 3. Cannot simply search all logs (ala logstash) using the request-id  
> > returned to the user without any post processing of the logs.
>  

> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Solution 2: Use thread local storage to store
> > 'x-openstack-request-id' returned from headers (suggested by Doug
> > Hellmann)
> >  
> > Reference:
> >  
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156508/9/specs/log-request-id-mapping
> > s.rst
> >  
> >  
> > Add new method 'get_openstack_request_id' to return this
> > request-id to the caller.
> >  
> >  
> > Pros:
> >  
> > 1. Doesn't break compatibility
> >  
> > 2. Minimal changes are required in client
> >  
> > 3. Build a full call graph
> >  
> >  
> > Cons:
> >  
> > 1. Malicious user can send long request-id to fill up the
> > disk-space, resulting in potential DoS
> >  
>  
>  
>  


Can’t this be easily mitigated by limiting the request-id size,
and denying any wrong request-id?
  
> >  
> > 2. Changes need to be done in all python-*clients
> >  
> > 3. Last request id should be flushed out in a subsequent call
> > otherwise it will return wrong request id to the caller
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Solution 3: Unique request-id across OpenStack Services (suggested
> > by Jamie Lennox)
> >  
> > Reference:
> >  
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156508/10/specs/log-request-id-mappin
> > gs.rst
> >  
> >  
> > Get 'x-openstack-request-id' from auth plugin and add it to the
> > request headers. If 'x-openstack-request-id' key is present in the
> > request header, then it will use the same one further or else it
> > will generate a new one.
> >  
> >  
> > Dependencies:
> >  
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164582/ - Include request-id in
> > auth plugin and add it to request headers
> >  
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/166063/ - Add session-object for
> > glance client
> >  
> > Add 'UserAuthPlugin' and '_ContextAuthPlugin' same as nova in
> > cinder and neutron
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Pros:
> >  
> > 1. Using same request id for the request crossing multiple service
> > boundaries will help operators/developers identify the problem  
> > quickly
> >  
> > 2. Required changes only in keystonemiddleware and oslo_middleware
> > libraries. No changes are required in the python client bindings
> > or OpenStack core services
> >  
>  
>  
>  


Why do we need to call keystone to get a request ID?, can’t we just
simply generate a random one if no req-id is provided in headers?

I believe calling keystone to start a new request is a bottleneck, and that’s
not generally necessary when you have an auth token already...
  
> >  
> >  
> > Cons:
> >  
> > 1. As 'x-openstack-request-id' in the request header will be
> > visible to the user, it is possible to send same request id for
> > multiple requests which in turn could create more problems in case
> > of troubleshooting cause of the failure as request_id middleware
> > will not check for its uniqueness in the scope of the running
> > OpenStack service.
> >  
> > 2. Having the same request ID for all services for a single user
> > API call means you cannot generate a full call graph. For example
> > if a single user's nova API call produces 2 calls to glance you
> > want to be able to differentiate the two different calls.
> >  
> >  
Why not tagging the request ID with the call number?

<req-id>/1 , <req-id>/2, <req-id>/3 … then it’s very easy
to trace order.

  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > During the Liberty design summit, I had a chance of discussing
> > these designs with some of the core members like Doug, Joe Gordon,
> > Jamie Lennox etc. But not able to came to any conclusion on the
> > final design and know the communities direction by which way they
> > want to use this request-id effectively.
> >  
> >  
> > However IMO, solution 1 sounds more useful as the debugger can
> > able to build the full call graph which can be helpful for
> > analysing gate failures effectively as well as end user will be
> > able to know his request-id and can track his request.
> >  
> >  
> > I request all community members to go through these solutions and
> > let us know which is the appropriate way to improve the logs by
> > logging request-id.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Thanks & Regards,
> >  
> >  
> > Abhishek Kekane
> >  
> >  
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest
> > confidence
> > for the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged,
> > confidential, and proprietary data. If you are not the intended
> > recipient,
> > please advise the sender by replying promptly to this email and
> > then delete
> > and destroy this email and any attachments without any further
> > use, copying
> > or forwarding.
> >  
> >  
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> > OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe (mailto:OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe)
> > <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest  
> > confidence for the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally  
> > privileged, confidential, and proprietary data. If you are not the  
> > intended recipient, please advise the sender by replying promptly to  
> > this email and then delete and destroy this email and any attachments  
> > without any further use, copying or forwarding.
> >  
> >  
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > ____ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:  
> > OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe (mailto:OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe)
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >  
>  
>  
> --  
>  
> Thanks,
> Nikhil
>  
>  
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe (mailto:OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe)
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>  
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest confidence
> for the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged,
> confidential, and proprietary data. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please advise the sender by replying promptly to this email and then delete
> and destroy this email and any attachments without any further use, copying
> or forwarding.
>  
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe (mailto:OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe)
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>  
>  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150603/4bb130dd/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list