Implement user caching to speed up PullPlan (#1109)
This commit is contained in:
parent
f0bac53e7b
commit
5bbed6ef9a
@ -95,12 +95,14 @@ std::unique_ptr<memgraph::query::FineGrainedAuthChecker> AuthChecker::GetFineGra
|
||||
}
|
||||
try {
|
||||
auto locked_auth = auth_->Lock();
|
||||
auto user = locked_auth->GetUser(username);
|
||||
if (!user) {
|
||||
throw memgraph::query::QueryRuntimeException("User '{}' doesn't exist .", username);
|
||||
if (username != user_.username()) {
|
||||
auto maybe_user = locked_auth->GetUser(username);
|
||||
if (!maybe_user) {
|
||||
throw memgraph::query::QueryRuntimeException("User '{}' doesn't exist .", username);
|
||||
}
|
||||
user_ = std::move(*maybe_user);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return std::make_unique<memgraph::glue::FineGrainedAuthChecker>(std::move(*user), dba);
|
||||
return std::make_unique<memgraph::glue::FineGrainedAuthChecker>(user_, dba);
|
||||
|
||||
} catch (const memgraph::auth::AuthException &e) {
|
||||
throw memgraph::query::QueryRuntimeException(e.what());
|
||||
|
@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ class AuthChecker : public query::AuthChecker {
|
||||
|
||||
private:
|
||||
memgraph::utils::Synchronized<memgraph::auth::Auth, memgraph::utils::WritePrioritizedRWLock> *auth_;
|
||||
mutable auth::User user_;
|
||||
};
|
||||
#ifdef MG_ENTERPRISE
|
||||
class FineGrainedAuthChecker : public query::FineGrainedAuthChecker {
|
||||
|
@ -1221,6 +1221,8 @@ PullPlan::PullPlan(const std::shared_ptr<CachedPlan> plan, const Parameters &par
|
||||
ctx_.evaluation_context.labels = NamesToLabels(plan->ast_storage().labels_, dba);
|
||||
#ifdef MG_ENTERPRISE
|
||||
if (license::global_license_checker.IsEnterpriseValidFast() && username.has_value() && dba) {
|
||||
// TODO How can we avoid creating this every time? If we must create it, it would be faster with an auth::User
|
||||
// instead of the username
|
||||
auto auth_checker = interpreter_context->auth_checker->GetFineGrainedAuthChecker(*username, dba);
|
||||
|
||||
// if the user has global privileges to read, edit and write anything, we don't need to perform authorization
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user