If I remember well, we merged some kind of simple authentication in Zeppelin. But it should be more about accessing the instance than having multiple users. One way could be launching multiple zeppelin instances, I think Kevin is doing something similar.
One thing to realize however is that it doesnt create separation at the data layer On Mar 28, 2015 1:53 AM, "RJ Nowling" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll report back if I'm successful with the approach I've mentioned. > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:51 AM, RJ Nowling <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A search of the user list suggests that Zeppelin can support a separate >> SparkContext for each notebook but the user who tried it ran into issues. >> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Denny Lee <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I haven't done this myself but was recently starting to do research on >>> doing this. Perhaps this blog post may be of help: >>> http://nginx.com/blog/websocket-nginx/ ? >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 9:24 AM Silvio Fiorito < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I haven’t tried this myself yet but something I’ve been thinking as >>>> well. Will the nginx reverse proxy support web sockets as well? >>>> >>>> Ideally we’d have isolated SparkContexts so users aren’t trampling >>>> over each other. Honestly I think it’d be good to have the option of >>>> starting a new SparkContext per notebook as well or using the model >>>> Databricks has where you “attach” a notebook to a cluster. >>>> >>>> From: RJ Nowling >>>> Reply-To: "[email protected]" >>>> Date: Friday, March 27, 2015 at 12:19 PM >>>> To: "[email protected]" >>>> Subject: Multi-user approach >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'm looking into ways to support multiple users with Zeppelin. I >>>> want to provide isolation between users. >>>> >>>> I'm considering the following approach: >>>> * Run Zeppelin under each user's account with its own set of ports >>>> * Use nginx as a reverse proxy for providing authentication >>>> >>>> Has anyone done anything similar? Any better alternatives? >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> RJ >>>> >>> >> >
