-
Marcelo Vanzin authored
Spark's I/O encryption uses an ephemeral key for each driver instance. So driver B cannot decrypt data written by driver A since it doesn't have the correct key. The write ahead log is used for recovery, thus needs to be readable by a different driver. So it cannot be encrypted by Spark's I/O encryption code. The BlockManager APIs used by the WAL code to write the data automatically encrypt data, so changes are needed so that callers can to opt out of encryption. Aside from that, the "putBytes" API in the BlockManager does not do encryption, so a separate situation arised where the WAL would write unencrypted data to the BM and, when those blocks were read, decryption would fail. So the WAL code needs to ask the BM to encrypt that data when encryption is enabled; this code is not optimal since it results in a (temporary) second copy of the data block in memory, but should be OK for now until a more performant solution is added. The non-encryption case should not be affected. Tested with new unit tests, and by running streaming apps that do recovery using the WAL data with I/O encryption turned on. Author: Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com> Closes #16862 from vanzin/SPARK-19520. (cherry picked from commit 0169360e) Signed-off-by:
Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com>
Marcelo Vanzin authoredSpark's I/O encryption uses an ephemeral key for each driver instance. So driver B cannot decrypt data written by driver A since it doesn't have the correct key. The write ahead log is used for recovery, thus needs to be readable by a different driver. So it cannot be encrypted by Spark's I/O encryption code. The BlockManager APIs used by the WAL code to write the data automatically encrypt data, so changes are needed so that callers can to opt out of encryption. Aside from that, the "putBytes" API in the BlockManager does not do encryption, so a separate situation arised where the WAL would write unencrypted data to the BM and, when those blocks were read, decryption would fail. So the WAL code needs to ask the BM to encrypt that data when encryption is enabled; this code is not optimal since it results in a (temporary) second copy of the data block in memory, but should be OK for now until a more performant solution is added. The non-encryption case should not be affected. Tested with new unit tests, and by running streaming apps that do recovery using the WAL data with I/O encryption turned on. Author: Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com> Closes #16862 from vanzin/SPARK-19520. (cherry picked from commit 0169360e) Signed-off-by:
Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com>