Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 1, 2023. It is now read-only.

fix: offer to use collection instead of tenant #19

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 18, 2023

Conversation

vasco-santos
Copy link
Contributor

@vasco-santos vasco-santos commented Sep 13, 2023

Previously we were building assuming that we could use one bucket and set the tenant ID as the way to integrate with Spade. This approach would also be tricky in future scenarios where we wanted to have the ability to have different configurations per SLA things (in case it materializes).

Talking with @jcace (SEE) about storefront property and whether we could rely on a friendly name (e.g. did:web:web3.storage) instead of an internal ID, we concluded that Spade would require a different bucket per tenant. However, each tenant MAY have different collections with different Replication Constraints.

We were asked to have different buckets per tenant, and swap tenant into collection. For now, we will also actually just have one tenant, so we can figure out later how could we have dynamic tenant world without needing to manually provision a bucket.

@vasco-santos vasco-santos force-pushed the fix/offer-to-use-collection-instead-of-tenant branch from 89a1e23 to 9bd9685 Compare September 13, 2023 12:14
@seed-deploy seed-deploy bot temporarily deployed to pr19 September 13, 2023 12:18 Inactive
@seed-deploy
Copy link

seed-deploy bot commented Sep 13, 2023

View stack outputs

@alanshaw
Copy link
Member

I don't understand what "buckets" means in this context.

tenant: string
// identifier of the collection for the tenant `did:web:web3.storage`
// spade relies on collections to identify different replication constraints.
collection: string
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not have both?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd suggest naming things we store under names that makes senses to us, and then mapping them at the points where we interface with spade. This would be "storefront" for us right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@vasco-santos vasco-santos Sep 15, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the bucket that Spade reads from us. In other words, this is the interface...

Copy link
Contributor Author

@vasco-santos vasco-santos Sep 15, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Might be worth to read https://github.com/web3-storage/dealer/blob/main/docs/architecture.md#spade-integration + the issue where we iterated on format in calls with Spade team #7 (comment)
@alanshaw

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah ok got it!

@vasco-santos vasco-santos merged commit d65fa26 into main Sep 18, 2023
4 checks passed
@vasco-santos vasco-santos deleted the fix/offer-to-use-collection-instead-of-tenant branch September 18, 2023 15:00
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants