I believe the same, but when you use V4 from s3cmd or the AWS S3 java API you get intermittend signature errors. Only after returning to V2 those errors are gone.
Jan Hugo On 08/18/2016 03:51 PM, Chris Jones wrote: > I believe RGW Hammer and below use V2 and Jewel and above use V4. > > Thanks > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:32 AM, jan hugo prins <jpr...@betterbe.com > <mailto:jpr...@betterbe.com>> wrote: > > did some more searching and according to some info I found RGW should > support V4 signatures. > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10333 > <http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10333> > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11858 > <http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11858> > > The fact that everyone still modifies s3cmd to use Version 2 > Signatures > suggests to me that we have a bug in this code. > > If I use V4 signatures most of my requests work fine, but some > requests > fail on a signature error. > > Thanks, > Jan Hugo Prins > > > On 08/18/2016 12:46 PM, jan hugo prins wrote: > > Hi everyone. > > > > To connect to my S3 gateways using s3cmd I had to set the option > > signature_v2 in my s3cfg to true. > > If I didn't do that I would get Signature mismatch errors and > this seems > > to be because Amazon uses Signature version 4 while the S3 > gateway of > > Ceph only supports Signature Version 2. > > > > Now I see the following error in a Jave project we are building that > > should talk to S3. > > > > Aug 18, 2016 12:12:38 PM > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve > > invoke > > SEVERE: Servlet.service() for servlet [Default] in context with path > > [/VehicleData] threw exception > > com.betterbe.vd.web.servlet.LsExceptionWrapper: > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > caused: com.amazonaws.services.s3.model.AmazonS3Exception: null > > (Service: Amazon S3; Status Code: 400; Error Code: > > XAmzContentSHA256Mismatch; Request ID: > > tx000000000000000002cc6-0057b58a15-25bba-default), S3 Extended > Request > > ID: 25bba-default-default > > at > > > > com.betterbe.vd.web.dataset.requesthandler.DatasetRequestHandler.handle(DatasetRequestHandler.java:262) > > at > com.betterbe.vd.web.servlet.Servlet.handler(Servlet.java:141) > > at > com.betterbe.vd.web.servlet.Servlet.doPost(Servlet.java:110) > > at > javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:646) > > > > To me this looks a bit the same, though I'm not a Java developer. > > Am I correct, and if so, can I tell the Java S3 client to use > Version 2 > > signatures? > > > > > > -- > Met vriendelijke groet / Best regards, > > Jan Hugo Prins > Infra and Isilon storage consultant > > Better.be B.V. > Auke Vleerstraat 140 E | 7547 AN Enschede | KvK 08097527 > T +31 (0) 53 48 00 694 | M +31 (0)6 26 358 951 > jpr...@betterbe.com <mailto:jpr...@betterbe.com> | > www.betterbe.com <http://www.betterbe.com> > > This e-mail is intended exclusively for the addressee(s), and may not > be passed on to, or made available for use by any person other than > the addressee(s). Better.be B.V. rules out any and every liability > resulting from any electronic transmission. > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com <mailto:ceph-users@lists.ceph.com> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com> > > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Chris Jones > > cjo...@cloudm2.com <mailto:cjo...@cloudm2.com> > (p) 770.655.0770 > -- Met vriendelijke groet / Best regards, Jan Hugo Prins Infra and Isilon storage consultant Better.be B.V. Auke Vleerstraat 140 E | 7547 AN Enschede | KvK 08097527 T +31 (0) 53 48 00 694 | M +31 (0)6 26 358 951 jpr...@betterbe.com | www.betterbe.com This e-mail is intended exclusively for the addressee(s), and may not be passed on to, or made available for use by any person other than the addressee(s). Better.be B.V. rules out any and every liability resulting from any electronic transmission.
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
