Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[improve][admin] Add authorization test for schema and align auth for transaction #22399

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Apr 9, 2024

Conversation

liangyepianzhou
Copy link
Contributor

@liangyepianzhou liangyepianzhou commented Apr 2, 2024

Motivation

  1. Add authorization tests for schema and transaction.
    2. Aligin authorization for transaction.

Modifications

1. Add authorization tests for schema and transaction.
2. Aligin authorization for transaction.
1. Check the role permission of the topic when getting stats for TB or TC.
2. Does not check the permission when fetching partition metadata to get stats for TC. (Draft, the another approach is to make the users grant the role lookup permission for the TC. It is a cognitive cost for users to learn about what is TC.)

Verifying this change

  • Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

  • Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (10MB)
  • Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

  • Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
  • The public API
  • The schema
  • The default values of configurations
  • The threading model
  • The binary protocol
  • The REST endpoints
  • The admin CLI options
  • The metrics
  • Anything that affects deployment

Documentation

  • doc
  • doc-required
  • doc-not-needed
  • doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

PR in forked repository:

@github-actions github-actions bot added the doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs label Apr 2, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 14.28571% with 6 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 32.12%. Comparing base (bbc6224) to head (dc5b494).
Report is 129 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #22399       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage     73.57%   32.12%   -41.46%     
+ Complexity    32624       87    -32537     
=============================================
  Files          1877     1743      -134     
  Lines        139502   132708     -6794     
  Branches      15299    14521      -778     
=============================================
- Hits         102638    42631    -60007     
- Misses        28908    83800    +54892     
+ Partials       7956     6277     -1679     
Flag Coverage Δ
inttests 27.08% <14.28%> (+2.49%) ⬆️
systests 24.62% <14.28%> (+0.30%) ⬆️
unittests ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
.../pulsar/broker/admin/impl/SchemasResourceBase.java 38.31% <50.00%> (-52.34%) ⬇️
...rg/apache/pulsar/broker/web/PulsarWebResource.java 27.94% <0.00%> (-36.10%) ⬇️
...che/pulsar/broker/admin/impl/TransactionsBase.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-73.66%) ⬇️

... and 1493 files with indirect coverage changes

@Technoboy- Technoboy- merged commit 9555504 into apache:master Apr 9, 2024
50 of 51 checks passed
hanmz pushed a commit to hanmz/pulsar that referenced this pull request Feb 12, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc-not-needed Your PR changes do not impact docs ready-to-test
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants