3:49 p.m.
Hi,
our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
large number of realms assigned to different instances of our application
(multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with the
startup and administration.
First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms that
Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should I
open tickets for both?
1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the "isNewInstall()" test to
check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and caching
of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I had
in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-2413
The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within Hibernate
every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't be changed by
default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
secs which is acceptable.
It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with the
flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually process
all the roles on all the realm for the admin
user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to navigate
through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has about
6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
Thanks,
Gabriel
--
Gabriel Lavoie
glavoie(a)gmail.com
4:04 p.m.
Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We made the
decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that has to
be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as well as
the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers, custom
themes, etc.).
In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as we
expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we test
this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for this
reason either.
I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have other
priorities that we need to work on.
However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side effects
(and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be happy to
accept them.
On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
large number of realms assigned to different instances of our application
(multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with the
startup and administration.
First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms that
Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should I
open tickets for both?
1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the "isNewInstall()" test to
check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and caching
of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I had
in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/
browse/KEYCLOAK-2413
The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
Hibernate
every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't be changed by
default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
secs which is acceptable.
It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with the
flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually process
all the roles on all the realm for the admin
user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to navigate
through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has about
6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
Thanks,
Gabriel
--
Gabriel Lavoie
glavoie(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
2:04 p.m.
Hi Stian,
your answer does surprise me (and my team) a bit as the Keycloak usage
examples, documentation, some blog post points to multi-tenancy with the
realm concept. We did not find any documentation that would discourage it.
I was curious about possible guidelines and 10 realms seems to be a very
low number.
This said, we took time almost a year ago to evaluate the architectural
limits (custom themes/providers are not an issue) and did load tests (with
large number of users and realms) on the different authentication endpoints
we needed to use and no big issue appeared at that time. We did expect to
find issues when ramping up the usage in QA/Production.
Keycloak is secured internally in our SaaS environment (only the necessary
paths/realms are exposed) and we automate the whole realm
creation/management to effectively manage security concerns. All we are
doing is creating a realm with a very specific configuration and repeating
the operation N times.
For the two issues I found, I already have ideas of how to fix them (and 1
fix proposal almost ready). In the meantime, we will consider different
deployment/provisioning options as workarounds.
Regards,
Gabriel
2016-10-18 10:04 GMT-04:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We made
the
decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that has to
be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as well as
the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers, custom
themes, etc.).
In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as we
expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we test
this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for this
reason either.
I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have other
priorities that we need to work on.
However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side effects
(and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be happy to
accept them.
On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
> large number of realms assigned to different instances of our application
> (multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with the
> startup and administration.
>
> First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms that
> Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
>
> I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should I
> open tickets for both?
>
> 1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
> In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the "isNewInstall()" test to
> check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and caching
> of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I
> had
> in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/brows
> e/KEYCLOAK-2413
>
> The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
> RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
> Hibernate
> every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't be changed
by
> default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
> secs which is acceptable.
>
> It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with the
> flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
> continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
> accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
>
> 2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
> When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually process
> all the roles on all the realm for the admin
> user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to
> navigate
> through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has about
> 6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
> benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gabriel
>
> --
> Gabriel Lavoie
> glavoie(a)gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-user mailing list
> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>
--
Gabriel Lavoie
glavoie(a)gmail.com
2:41 p.m.
I can appreciate that the multi-tenancy concept does conflict with what I'm
saying here, but that was contributed by community and in that use-case
they only had a few realms. We've been asked this questions a few times on
the mailing list though and we have responded with it may work, but we
haven't tested it, nor have we planned for it to be used that way.
I'm not saying it'll be a problem with more than 10, just saying that's
what we had in mind as what the maximum people would have. Unless of course
you're building out a SaaS or something on top of Keycloak. In that case I
would believe you're probably making money out of what you are doing and
you should be able to afford to spend some time contributing to Keycloak.
We simply don't have the resources to test this scenario and improve the
performance around it.
On 19 October 2016 at 14:04, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Stian,
your answer does surprise me (and my team) a bit as the Keycloak
usage examples, documentation, some blog post points to multi-tenancy with
the realm concept. We did not find any documentation that would discourage
it. I was curious about possible guidelines and 10 realms seems to be a
very low number.
This said, we took time almost a year ago to evaluate the architectural
limits (custom themes/providers are not an issue) and did load tests (with
large number of users and realms) on the different authentication endpoints
we needed to use and no big issue appeared at that time. We did expect to
find issues when ramping up the usage in QA/Production.
Keycloak is secured internally in our SaaS environment (only the necessary
paths/realms are exposed) and we automate the whole realm
creation/management to effectively manage security concerns. All we are
doing is creating a realm with a very specific configuration and repeating
the operation N times.
For the two issues I found, I already have ideas of how to fix them (and 1
fix proposal almost ready). In the meantime, we will consider different
deployment/provisioning options as workarounds.
Regards,
Gabriel
2016-10-18 10:04 GMT-04:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
> Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We made the
> decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that has to
> be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as well as
> the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers, custom
> themes, etc.).
>
> In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as we
> expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we test
> this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for this
> reason either.
>
> I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have other
> priorities that we need to work on.
>
> However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side effects
> (and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be happy to
> accept them.
>
> On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
>> large number of realms assigned to different instances of our application
>> (multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with the
>> startup and administration.
>>
>> First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms that
>> Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
>>
>> I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should
>> I
>> open tickets for both?
>>
>> 1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
>> In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the "isNewInstall()"
test
>> to
>> check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and
>> caching
>> of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I
>> had
>> in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/brows
>> e/KEYCLOAK-2413
>>
>> The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
>> RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
>> Hibernate
>> every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't be
changed by
>> default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
>> secs which is acceptable.
>>
>> It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with the
>> flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
>> continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
>> accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
>>
>> 2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
>> When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually process
>> all the roles on all the realm for the admin
>> user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to
>> navigate
>> through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has
>> about
>> 6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
>> benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gabriel
>>
>> --
>> Gabriel Lavoie
>> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-user mailing list
>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>>
>
>
--
Gabriel Lavoie
glavoie(a)gmail.com
3:55 p.m.
Stain,
I completely understand your position regarding multi-tenancy and Keycloak; that you would
like the community to contribute back on identifying issues and improving the performance
for 10+ realms configuration.
Out of curiosity, does the same apply to Redhat SSO customers who are already paying for
support?
--
Christopher Savory
<http://www.edlogics.com/>
On 10/19/16, 7:41 AM, "Stian Thorgersen" <sthorger(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I can appreciate that the multi-tenancy concept does conflict with what I'm
saying here, but that was contributed by community and in that use-case
they only had a few realms. We've been asked this questions a few times on
the mailing list though and we have responded with it may work, but we
haven't tested it, nor have we planned for it to be used that way.
I'm not saying it'll be a problem with more than 10, just saying that's
what we had in mind as what the maximum people would have. Unless of course
you're building out a SaaS or something on top of Keycloak. In that case I
would believe you're probably making money out of what you are doing and
you should be able to afford to spend some time contributing to Keycloak.
We simply don't have the resources to test this scenario and improve the
performance around it.
On 19 October 2016 at 14:04, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Stian,
your answer does surprise me (and my team) a bit as the Keycloak
usage examples, documentation, some blog post points to multi-tenancy with
the realm concept. We did not find any documentation that would discourage
it. I was curious about possible guidelines and 10 realms seems to be a
very low number.
This said, we took time almost a year ago to evaluate the architectural
limits (custom themes/providers are not an issue) and did load tests (with
large number of users and realms) on the different authentication endpoints
we needed to use and no big issue appeared at that time. We did expect to
find issues when ramping up the usage in QA/Production.
Keycloak is secured internally in our SaaS environment (only the necessary
paths/realms are exposed) and we automate the whole realm
creation/management to effectively manage security concerns. All we are
doing is creating a realm with a very specific configuration and repeating
the operation N times.
For the two issues I found, I already have ideas of how to fix them (and 1
fix proposal almost ready). In the meantime, we will consider different
deployment/provisioning options as workarounds.
Regards,
Gabriel
2016-10-18 10:04 GMT-04:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
> Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We made the
> decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that has to
> be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as well as
> the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers, custom
> themes, etc.).
>
> In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as we
> expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we test
> this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for this
> reason either.
>
> I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have other
> priorities that we need to work on.
>
> However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side effects
> (and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be happy to
> accept them.
>
> On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
>> large number of realms assigned to different instances of our application
>> (multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with the
>> startup and administration.
>>
>> First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms that
>> Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
>>
>> I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should
>> I
>> open tickets for both?
>>
>> 1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
>> In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the "isNewInstall()"
test
>> to
>> check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and
>> caching
>> of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I
>> had
>> in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/brows
>> e/KEYCLOAK-2413
>>
>> The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
>> RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
>> Hibernate
>> every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't be
changed by
>> default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
>> secs which is acceptable.
>>
>> It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with the
>> flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
>> continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
>> accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
>>
>> 2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
>> When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually process
>> all the roles on all the realm for the admin
>> user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to
>> navigate
>> through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has
>> about
>> 6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
>> benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gabriel
>>
>> --
>> Gabriel Lavoie
>> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-user mailing list
>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>>
>
>
--
Gabriel Lavoie
glavoie(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
4:07 p.m.
On 19 October 2016 at 15:55, Chris Savory <chris.savory(a)edlogics.com> wrote:
Stain,
I completely understand your position regarding multi-tenancy and
Keycloak; that you would like the community to contribute back on
identifying issues and improving the performance for 10+ realms
configuration.
Out of curiosity, does the same apply to Redhat SSO customers who are
already paying for support?
I could have asked you to create Keycloak JIRA issues for your issues, but
as I know it wouldn't be prioritized I'd rather tell you outright that we
wouldn't work on it.
Customers have separate channels to report issues and these are prioritized
higher than community request.
--
Christopher Savory
<http://www.edlogics.com/>
On 10/19/16, 7:41 AM, "Stian Thorgersen" <sthorger(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I can appreciate that the multi-tenancy concept does conflict with
what I'm
saying here, but that was contributed by community and in that use-case
they only had a few realms. We've been asked this questions a few
times on
the mailing list though and we have responded with it may work, but we
haven't tested it, nor have we planned for it to be used that way.
I'm not saying it'll be a problem with more than 10, just saying that's
what we had in mind as what the maximum people would have. Unless of
course
you're building out a SaaS or something on top of Keycloak. In that
case I
would believe you're probably making money out of what you are doing
and
you should be able to afford to spend some time contributing to
Keycloak.
We simply don't have the resources to test this scenario and improve
the
performance around it.
On 19 October 2016 at 14:04, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Stian,
> your answer does surprise me (and my team) a bit as the Keycloak
> usage examples, documentation, some blog post points to
multi-tenancy with
> the realm concept. We did not find any documentation that would
discourage
> it. I was curious about possible guidelines and 10 realms seems to
be a
> very low number.
>
> This said, we took time almost a year ago to evaluate the
architectural
> limits (custom themes/providers are not an issue) and did load tests
(with
> large number of users and realms) on the different authentication
endpoints
> we needed to use and no big issue appeared at that time. We did
expect to
> find issues when ramping up the usage in QA/Production.
>
> Keycloak is secured internally in our SaaS environment (only the
necessary
> paths/realms are exposed) and we automate the whole realm
> creation/management to effectively manage security concerns. All we
are
> doing is creating a realm with a very specific configuration and
repeating
> the operation N times.
>
> For the two issues I found, I already have ideas of how to fix them
(and 1
> fix proposal almost ready). In the meantime, we will consider
different
> deployment/provisioning options as workarounds.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gabriel
>
> 2016-10-18 10:04 GMT-04:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
>
>> Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We
made the
>> decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that
has to
>> be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as
well as
>> the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers,
custom
>> themes, etc.).
>>
>> In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as
we
>> expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we
test
>> this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for
this
>> reason either.
>>
>> I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have
other
>> priorities that we need to work on.
>>
>> However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side
effects
>> (and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be
happy to
>> accept them.
>>
>> On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion
with a
>>> large number of realms assigned to different instances of our
application
>>> (multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues
with the
>>> startup and administration.
>>>
>>> First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of
realms that
>>> Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
>>>
>>> I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved.
Should
>>> I
>>> open tickets for both?
>>>
>>> 1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
>>> In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the
"isNewInstall()"
test
>>> to
>>> check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and
>>> caching
>>> of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue
that I
>>> had
>>> in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/brows
>>> e/KEYCLOAK-2413
>>>
>>> The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
>>> RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
>>> Hibernate
>>> every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't
be
changed by
>>> default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to
approximately 30
>>> secs which is acceptable.
>>>
>>> It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction
with the
>>> flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
>>> continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is
filled,
>>> accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
>>>
>>> 2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
>>> When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually
process
>>> all the roles on all the realm for the admin
>>> user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to
>>> navigate
>>> through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user
has
>>> about
>>> 6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would
likely
>>> benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Gabriel
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gabriel Lavoie
>>> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> keycloak-user mailing list
>>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Gabriel Lavoie
> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
4:47 p.m.
I’d rather you be honest about it. Thanks for the update.
--
Christopher Savory
From: Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>
Reply-To: "stian(a)redhat.com" <stian(a)redhat.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 9:07 AM
To: Chris Savory <chris.savory(a)edlogics.com>
Cc: Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com>, keycloak-user
<keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org>
Subject: Re: [keycloak-user] Performance issues with large number of realms (500+)
On 19 October 2016 at 15:55, Chris Savory <chris.savory(a)edlogics.com> wrote:
Stain,
I completely understand your position regarding multi-tenancy and Keycloak; that you would
like the community to contribute back on identifying issues and improving the performance
for 10+ realms configuration.
Out of curiosity, does the same apply to Redhat SSO customers who are already paying for
support?
I could have asked you to create Keycloak JIRA issues for your issues, but as I know it
wouldn't be prioritized I'd rather tell you outright that we wouldn't work on
it.
Customers have separate channels to report issues and these are prioritized higher than
community request.
--
Christopher Savory
<http://www.edlogics.com/>
On 10/19/16, 7:41 AM, "Stian Thorgersen" <sthorger(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I can appreciate that the multi-tenancy concept does conflict with what I'm
saying here, but that was contributed by community and in that use-case
they only had a few realms. We've been asked this questions a few times on
the mailing list though and we have responded with it may work, but we
haven't tested it, nor have we planned for it to be used that way.
I'm not saying it'll be a problem with more than 10, just saying that's
what we had in mind as what the maximum people would have. Unless of course
you're building out a SaaS or something on top of Keycloak. In that case I
would believe you're probably making money out of what you are doing and
you should be able to afford to spend some time contributing to Keycloak.
We simply don't have the resources to test this scenario and improve the
performance around it.
On 19 October 2016 at 14:04, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Stian,
> your answer does surprise me (and my team) a bit as the Keycloak
> usage examples, documentation, some blog post points to multi-tenancy with
> the realm concept. We did not find any documentation that would discourage
> it. I was curious about possible guidelines and 10 realms seems to be a
> very low number.
>
> This said, we took time almost a year ago to evaluate the architectural
> limits (custom themes/providers are not an issue) and did load tests (with
> large number of users and realms) on the different authentication endpoints
> we needed to use and no big issue appeared at that time. We did expect to
> find issues when ramping up the usage in QA/Production.
>
> Keycloak is secured internally in our SaaS environment (only the necessary
> paths/realms are exposed) and we automate the whole realm
> creation/management to effectively manage security concerns. All we are
> doing is creating a realm with a very specific configuration and repeating
> the operation N times.
>
> For the two issues I found, I already have ideas of how to fix them (and 1
> fix proposal almost ready). In the meantime, we will consider different
> deployment/provisioning options as workarounds.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gabriel
>
> 2016-10-18 10:04 GMT-04:00 Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
>
>> Keycloak was not designed to support multi-tenancy directly. We made the
>> decision early on that we can't support true multi-tenancy and that has
to
>> be done through separate instances. This is for security reasons as well as
>> the fact that we can't sandbox everything (like custom providers, custom
>> themes, etc.).
>>
>> In that regards we have never tested with high amounts of realms as we
>> expect there to be few realms (up to 10 most likely). Nor will we test
>> this. We won't fix any issues related to high number of realms for this
>> reason either.
>>
>> I'm not saying that we don't appreciate your case, but we have other
>> priorities that we need to work on.
>>
>> However, if you are able to provide PRs that do not have any side effects
>> (and also doesn't significantly complicate things) we would be happy to
>> accept them.
>>
>> On 18 October 2016 at 15:49, Gabriel Lavoie <glavoie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> our Keycloak setup is being used in a multi-tenant fashion with a
>>> large number of realms assigned to different instances of our
application
>>> (multiple customers). We are now seeing a few performance issues with
the
>>> startup and administration.
>>>
>>> First question: Do you have guidelines on a maximum number of realms
that
>>> Keycloak should support before we split in smaller clusters?
>>>
>>> I traced at least 2 things in the KC code that could be improved. Should
>>> I
>>> open tickets for both?
>>>
>>> 1 - Slow startup (5 minutes with 500 realms):
>>> In the KeycloakApplication class constructor, the
"isNewInstall()" test
>>> to
>>> check if the master realm must be created triggers the loading and
>>> caching
>>> of all realms. This loading seems to be hit with a similar issue that I
>>> had
>>> in the past with realm export: https://issues.jboss.org/brows
>>> e/KEYCLOAK-2413
>>>
>>> The named query that gets executed a lot of times in
>>> RealmAdapter.getAuthenticationExecution() triggers a flush within
>>> Hibernate
>>> every times. If the flush mode gets set to "COMMIT" (can't
be changed by
>>> default but I tested it), the loading time goes down to approximately 30
>>> secs which is acceptable.
>>>
>>> It would likely be a good idea to create a read-only transaction with
the
>>> flush mode set to COMMIT during startup to pre-fill the cache, then
>>> continue with the rest of the initialization. When the cache is filled,
>>> accessing info on all realms seems to be fine.
>>>
>>> 2 - Slow display of the master realm admin screen.
>>> When accessing the admin screen, AdminConsole.whoAmI() eventually
process
>>> all the roles on all the realm for the admin
>>> user. KeycloakModelUtils.searchFor() gets called a lot of times to
>>> navigate
>>> through all the composite permissions. With 500 realms, the user has
>>> about
>>> 6500 total permissions available. This part of the code would likely
>>> benefit a lot from a cache of the exploded composite permissions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Gabriel
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gabriel Lavoie
>>> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> keycloak-user mailing list
>>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Gabriel Lavoie
> glavoie(a)gmail.com
>
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
2752
days inactive
2753
days old
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Chris Savory -
Gabriel Lavoie -
Stian Thorgersen