forked from Deuxfleurs/garage
Work on structure + Getting started is reworked
This commit is contained in:
parent
0afc701a69
commit
c50113acf3
7 changed files with 151 additions and 103 deletions
|
|
@ -8,19 +8,19 @@
|
|||
- [Create buckets and keys](./getting_started/bucket.md)
|
||||
- [Handle files](./getting_started/files.md)
|
||||
|
||||
# Cookbooks
|
||||
|
||||
- [Cookbooks]()
|
||||
- [Host a website](./website.md)
|
||||
- [Integrate as a media backend]()
|
||||
- [Operate a cluster]()
|
||||
|
||||
# Reference Manual
|
||||
|
||||
- [Reference Manual]()
|
||||
- [Garage CLI]()
|
||||
- [S3 API](./compatibility.md)
|
||||
|
||||
# Design
|
||||
|
||||
- [Design]()
|
||||
- [Related Work](./related_work.md)
|
||||
- [Internals](./internals.md)
|
||||
|
||||
# Development
|
||||
|
||||
- [Development]()
|
||||
- [Setup your environment](./devenv.md)
|
||||
- [Your first contribution]()
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
# Gettin Started
|
||||
# Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
Let's start your Garage journey!
|
||||
In this chapter, we explain how to deploy a simple garage cluster and start interacting with it.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1 +1,71 @@
|
|||
# Create buckets and keys
|
||||
|
||||
First, chances are that your garage deployment is secured by TLS.
|
||||
All your commands must be prefixed with their certificates.
|
||||
I will define an alias once and for all to ease future commands.
|
||||
Please adapt the path of the binary and certificates to your installation!
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
alias grg="/garage/garage --ca-cert /secrets/garage-ca.crt --client-cert /secrets/garage.crt --client-key /secrets/garage.key"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now we can check that everything is going well by checking our cluster status:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg status
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Don't forget that `help` command and `--help` subcommands can help you anywhere, the CLI tool is self-documented! Two examples:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg help
|
||||
grg bucket allow --help
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Fine, now let's create a bucket (we imagine that you want to deploy nextcloud):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket create nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Check that everything went well:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket list
|
||||
grg bucket info nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now we will generate an API key to access this bucket.
|
||||
Note that API keys are independent of buckets: one key can access multiple buckets, multiple keys can access one bucket.
|
||||
|
||||
Now, let's start by creating a key only for our PHP application:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg key new --name nextcloud-app-key
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You will have the following output (this one is fake, `key_id` and `secret_key` were generated with the openssl CLI tool):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Key { key_id: "GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558", secret_key: "7d37d093435a41f2aab8f13c19ba067d9776c90215f56614adad6ece597dbb34", name: "nextcloud-app-key", name_timestamp: 1603280506694, deleted: false, authorized_buckets: [] }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Check that everything works as intended (be careful, info works only with your key identifier and not with its friendly name!):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg key list
|
||||
grg key info GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now that we have a bucket and a key, we need to give permissions to the key on the bucket!
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket allow --read --write nextcloud-bucket --key GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You can check at any times allowed keys on your bucket with:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket info nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,3 +1,25 @@
|
|||
# Installation
|
||||
|
||||
Currently, only two installations procedures are supported for Garage: from Docker (x86\_64 for Linux) and from source.
|
||||
In the future, we plan to add a third one, by publishing a compiled binary (x86\_64 for Linux).
|
||||
We did not test other architecture/operating system but, as long as your architecture/operating system is supported by Rust, you should be able to run Garage (feel free to report your tests!).
|
||||
|
||||
## From Docker
|
||||
|
||||
Garage is a software that can be run only in a cluster and requires at least 3 instances.
|
||||
If you plan to run the 3 instances on your machine for test purposes, we recommend a **docker-compose** deployment.
|
||||
If you have 3 independent machines (or 3 VM on independent machines) that can communite together, a **simple docker** deployment is enough.
|
||||
In any case, you first need to pick a Docker image version.
|
||||
|
||||
Our docker image is currently named `lxpz/garage_amd64` and is stored on the [Docker Hub](https://hub.docker.com/r/lxpz/garage_amd64/tags?page=1&ordering=last_updated).
|
||||
We encourage you to use a fixed tag (eg. `v0.1.1d`) and not the `latest` tag.
|
||||
For this example, we will use the latest published version at the time of the writing which is `v0.1.1d` but it's up to you
|
||||
to check [the most recent versions on the Docker Hub](https://hub.docker.com/r/lxpz/garage_amd64/tags?page=1&ordering=last_updated).
|
||||
|
||||
### Single machine deployment with docker-compose
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Multiple machine deployment with docker
|
||||
|
||||
## From source
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -10,17 +10,17 @@ To promote better data management policies, with focused on the following desira
|
|||
- **Self-contained & lightweight**: works everywhere and integrates well in existing environments to target hyperconverged infrastructures
|
||||
- **Highly resilient**: highly resilient to network failures, network latency, disk failures, sysadmin failures
|
||||
- **Simple**: simple to understand, simple to operate, simple to debug
|
||||
- **Internet enabled**: Made for multi-sites (eg. datacenter, offices, etc.) interconnected through a regular internet connection.
|
||||
- **Internet enabled**: made for multi-sites (eg. datacenter, offices, etc.) interconnected through a regular internet connection.
|
||||
|
||||
We also noted that the pursuit of some other goals are detrimental to our initial goals.
|
||||
The following have been identified has non-goals, if it matters to you, you should not use Garage:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Extreme performances**: high performances constrain a lot the design and the deployment. We always prioritize
|
||||
- **Feature extensiveness**: Complete implementation of the S3 API
|
||||
- **Storage optimizations**: Erasure coding (our replication model is simply to copy the data as is on several nodes, in different datacenters if possible)
|
||||
- **POSIX/Filesystem compatibility**: We do not aim at being POSIX compatible or to emulate any kind of filesystem. Indeed, in a distributed environment, such syncronizations are translated in network messages that impose severe constraints on the deployment.
|
||||
- **Extreme performances**: high performances constrain a lot the design and the infrastructure; we seek performances through minimalism only.
|
||||
- **Feature extensiveness**: complete implementation of the S3 API or any other API to make garage a drop-in replacement is not targeted as it could lead to decisions impacting our desirable properties.
|
||||
- **Storage optimizations**: erasure coding or any other coding technique both increase the difficulty of placing data and synchronizing; we limit ourselves to duplication.
|
||||
- **POSIX/Filesystem compatibility**: we do not aim at being POSIX compatible or to emulate any kind of filesystem. Indeed, in a distributed environment, such syncronizations are translated in network messages that impose severe constraints on the deployment.
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration in environments
|
||||
## Supported and planned protocols
|
||||
|
||||
Garage speaks (or will speak) the following protocols:
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -36,9 +36,9 @@ We plan to add logic to Garage to make it a viable solution for email storage.
|
|||
Especially, it is used to host their main website, this documentation and some of its members's blogs. Additionally,
|
||||
Garage is used as a [backend for Nextcloud](https://docs.nextcloud.com/server/20/admin_manual/configuration_files/primary_storage.html). Deuxfleurs also plans to use Garage as their [Matrix's media backend](https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse-s3-storage-provider) and has the backend of [OCIS](https://github.com/owncloud/ocis).
|
||||
|
||||
*Are you using Garage? Open a pull request to add your organization here!*
|
||||
*Are you using Garage? [Open a pull request](https://git.deuxfleurs.fr/Deuxfleurs/garage/) to add your organization here!*
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparisons to existing software
|
||||
## Comparison to existing software
|
||||
|
||||
**[Minio](https://min.io/) :** Minio shares our *self-contained & lightweight* goal but selected two of our non-goals: *storage optimizations* through erasure coding and *POSIX/Filesystem compatibility* through strong consistency.
|
||||
However, by pursuing these two non-goals, minio do not reach our desirable properties.
|
||||
|
|
@ -46,17 +46,26 @@ First, it fails on the *simple* property: due to the erasure coding, minio has s
|
|||
Second, it fails on the *interned enabled* property: due to its strong consistency, minio is latency sensitive.
|
||||
Furthermore, minio has no knowledge of "sites" and thus can not distribute data to minimize the failure of a given site.
|
||||
|
||||
**[Openstack Swift](https://docs.openstack.org/swift/latest/)**
|
||||
**[Openstack Swift](https://docs.openstack.org/swift/latest/) :**
|
||||
OpenStack Swift at least fails on the *self-contained & lightweight* goal.
|
||||
Starting it requires around 8Gb of RAM, which is too much especially in an hyperconverged infrastructure.
|
||||
It seems also to be far from *Simple*.
|
||||
|
||||
**[Pithos](https://github.com/exoscale/pithos)**
|
||||
Pithos has been abandonned and should probably not used yet, in the following we explain why we did not pick their design.
|
||||
Pithos was relying as a S3 proxy in front of Cassandra (and was working with Scylla DB too).
|
||||
From its designers' mouth, storing data in Cassandra has shown its limitations justifying the project abandonment.
|
||||
They built a closed-source version 2 that does not store blobs in the database (only metadata) but did not communicate further on it.
|
||||
We considered there v2's design but concluded that it does not fit both our *Self-contained & lightweight* and *Simple* properties. It makes the development, the deployment and the operations more complicated while reducing the flexibility.
|
||||
**[Ceph](https://ceph.io/ceph-storage/object-storage/) :**
|
||||
This review holds for the whole Ceph stack, including the RADOS paper, Ceph Object Storage module, the RADOS Gateway, etc.
|
||||
At is core, Ceph has been designed to provide *POSIX/Filesystem compatibility* which requires strong consistency, which in turn
|
||||
makes Ceph latency sensitive and fails our *Internet enabled* goal.
|
||||
Due to its industry oriented design, Ceph is also far from being *Simple* to operate and from being *self-contained & lightweight* which makes it hard to integrate it in an hyperconverged infrastructure.
|
||||
In a certain way, Ceph and Minio are closer togethers than they are from Garage or OpenStack Swift.
|
||||
|
||||
**[IPFS](https://ipfs.io/)**
|
||||
*Not written yet*
|
||||
*More comparisons are available in our [Related Work](design/related_work.md) chapter.*
|
||||
|
||||
## Community
|
||||
|
||||
If you want to discuss with us, you can join our Matrix channel at [#garage:deuxfleurs.fr](https://matrix.to/#/#garage:deuxfleurs.fr).
|
||||
Our code and our issue tracker, which is the place where you should report bugs, are managed on [Deuxfleurs' Gitea](https://git.deuxfleurs.fr/Deuxfleurs/garage).
|
||||
|
||||
## License
|
||||
|
||||
Garage, all the source code, is released under the [AGPL v3 License](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html).
|
||||
Please note that if you patch Garage and then use it to provide any service over a network, you must share your code!
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,71 +0,0 @@
|
|||
# Configuring a cluster
|
||||
|
||||
First, chances are that your garage deployment is secured by TLS.
|
||||
All your commands must be prefixed with their certificates.
|
||||
I will define an alias once and for all to ease future commands.
|
||||
Please adapt the path of the binary and certificates to your installation!
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
alias grg="/garage/garage --ca-cert /secrets/garage-ca.crt --client-cert /secrets/garage.crt --client-key /secrets/garage.key"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now we can check that everything is going well by checking our cluster status:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg status
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Don't forget that `help` command and `--help` subcommands can help you anywhere, the CLI tool is self-documented! Two examples:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg help
|
||||
grg bucket allow --help
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Fine, now let's create a bucket (we imagine that you want to deploy nextcloud):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket create nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Check that everything went well:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket list
|
||||
grg bucket info nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now we will generate an API key to access this bucket.
|
||||
Note that API keys are independent of buckets: one key can access multiple buckets, multiple keys can access one bucket.
|
||||
|
||||
Now, let's start by creating a key only for our PHP application:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg key new --name nextcloud-app-key
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You will have the following output (this one is fake, `key_id` and `secret_key` were generated with the openssl CLI tool):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Key { key_id: "GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558", secret_key: "7d37d093435a41f2aab8f13c19ba067d9776c90215f56614adad6ece597dbb34", name: "nextcloud-app-key", name_timestamp: 1603280506694, deleted: false, authorized_buckets: [] }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Check that everything works as intended (be careful, info works only with your key identifier and not with its friendly name!):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg key list
|
||||
grg key info GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now that we have a bucket and a key, we need to give permissions to the key on the bucket!
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket allow --read --write nextcloud-bucket --key GK3515373e4c851ebaad366558
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You can check at any times allowed keys on your bucket with:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
grg bucket info nextcloud-bucket
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
|
|||
# Related Work
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
Data storage is critical: it can lead to data loss if done badly and/or on hardware failure.
|
||||
|
|
@ -8,7 +10,7 @@ But here we consider non specialized off the shelf machines that can be as low p
|
|||
Distributed storage may help to solve both availability and scalability problems on these machines.
|
||||
Many solutions were proposed, they can be categorized as block storage, file storage and object storage depending on the abstraction they provide.
|
||||
|
||||
## Related work
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Block storage is the most low level one, it's like exposing your raw hard drive over the network.
|
||||
It requires very low latencies and stable network, that are often dedicated.
|
||||
|
|
@ -36,3 +38,19 @@ However Pithos is not maintained anymore. More precisely the company that publis
|
|||
Some tests conducted by the [ACIDES project](https://acides.org/) have shown that Openstack Swift consumes way more resources (CPU+RAM) that we can afford. Furthermore, people developing Swift have not designed their software for geo-distribution.
|
||||
|
||||
There were many attempts in research too. I am only thinking to [LBFS](https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/lbfs:sosp01/lbfs.pdf) that was used as a basis for Seafile. But none of them have been effectively implemented yet.
|
||||
|
||||
## Existing software
|
||||
|
||||
**[Pithos](https://github.com/exoscale/pithos) :**
|
||||
Pithos has been abandonned and should probably not used yet, in the following we explain why we did not pick their design.
|
||||
Pithos was relying as a S3 proxy in front of Cassandra (and was working with Scylla DB too).
|
||||
From its designers' mouth, storing data in Cassandra has shown its limitations justifying the project abandonment.
|
||||
They built a closed-source version 2 that does not store blobs in the database (only metadata) but did not communicate further on it.
|
||||
We considered there v2's design but concluded that it does not fit both our *Self-contained & lightweight* and *Simple* properties. It makes the development, the deployment and the operations more complicated while reducing the flexibility.
|
||||
|
||||
**[IPFS](https://ipfs.io/) :**
|
||||
*Not written yet*
|
||||
|
||||
## Specific research papers
|
||||
|
||||
*Not yet written*
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue