[keycloak-dev] User Federation Provider Cache
Marek Posolda
mposolda at redhat.com
Mon Jun 13 03:39:48 EDT 2016
We discussed some time ago how to ensure that UserFederationProvider
lifecycle is properly tight to KeycloakSession
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/2016-April/007123.html .
The last we discussed was to add new method on KeycloakSession like:
<T extends Provider> T getProvider(Class<T> clazz, String id, String
instanceId);
where instanceId is the state associated with the provider (in case of
UserFederationProvider it will be DB ID of
UserFederationProviderModelId). That way, the
UserFederationProviderFactory.create can load the
UserFederationProviderModel (assumption is that RealmModel is available
in KeycloakContext, so UserFederationProviderFactory.create has access
to RealmModel + providerDatabaseId to load it from DB).
In the thread, you can see that I've initially proposed something
similar to your proposal, but it's a bit more complex though. Hopefully
going "simple" way and adding just the method with "instanceId" String
argument can solve the issue.
Marek
On 10/06/16 01:36, Ariel Carrera wrote:
> There is not problem! :)
> One more thing, I solved the problem of multiple "federation provider"
> instances, adding this code to the DefaultKeycloakSession (and the
> method definition in KeycloakSession interface):
>
> public <T extends Provider> void registerProvider(Class<T> clazz,
> Provider provider, String id) {
> Integer hash = clazz.hashCode() + id.hashCode();
> providers.put(hash, provider);
> }
>
>
> And into MyUserFederationProviderFactory.getInstance(session, model)
> something like this:
>
> public UserFederationProvider getInstance(KeycloakSession session,
> UserFederationProviderModel model){
> UserFederationProvider provider = (UserFederationProvider)
> session.getProvider(UserFederationProvider.class, model.getId());
> if (provider == null){
> lazyInit(session);
> provider = new MyUserFederationProvider(session, model,
> config, ......);
> ((KeycloakSession)session).registerProvider(UserFederationProvider.class,
> provider, model.getId());
> };
> return provider;
> }
>
>
> After a few tests and debug it seems to work... creating, catching,
> and closing provider instances as expected.
>
>
> In future versions as you said, maybe would be better include a way to
> instantiate a complex object/provider instead of doing
>
> ProviderFactory.create(KeycloakSession session)
> some kind of method like
> ProviderFactory.create(KeycloakSession session, Object... obj);
>
> and the appropriate method into the KeycloakSession
>
> <T extends Provider> T getProvider(Class<T> clazz, Object... obj);
> <T extends Provider> T getProvider(Class<T> clazz, String id,
> Object... obj);
>
>
> And why not a map into the keycloakSession to store some additional
> context data to share between providers during same request? It's only
> a vague idea
>
> Regards!
>
> 2016-06-09 17:14 GMT-03:00 Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com
> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>>:
>
> Its gonna be awhile. Its going to be difficult to make everything
> both backward compatible and cover all the current and future use
> cases we need to cover. Listen on the dev list. I should post
> some info soon on what the new impl will look like.
>
>
> On 6/9/16 3:57 PM, Ariel Carrera wrote:
>> Yes Bill, exactly! I will waiting to test it Thanks!
>>
>> 2016-06-09 16:29 GMT-03:00 Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com
>> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/9/16 2:52 PM, Ariel Carrera wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bill, is a little expensive for me because I am
>> creating a new entity manager to connect with a legacy
>> database, and creating/enlisting a transaction per instance.
>> For example in a simple flow case where a user needs to
>> click "I forgot my password" link to recover the
>> password, there is more than nine or ten instances
>> created to do this. It's really not a big problem but I
>> think that is not necessary and can be implemented like
>> others spi providers catched into the keycloak session.
>>
>> This is good feedback. We need a way to associate a
>> provider, by name, to the KeycloakSession. Maybe we just
>> need a way to associate anything with the KeycloakSession period.
>>
>> In my case, another difficulty is synchronization between
>> an old authentication system and keycloak implemented on
>> demand (there is no full/partial syncrhonization because
>> the legacy system is still working and need to work
>> together for a while). Also I implemented synchronization
>> support but at this moment it not used.
>> Every time that keycloak needs to validate a user
>> (isValid) recovered from the user storage or cache, a
>> query to the legacy system is made. Added to this... I
>> need to recover some attributes and roles changes
>> produced on the legacy system.... so I decided to
>> implement a "user federation cache" with a short term
>> expiration to improve the performance with certain
>> synchronization delay tolerance.
>>
>> In a few words I have: a custom User Federation Provider
>> + on deman synchronization + a user Federation Provider
>> Cache (my own cache SPI).
>>
>> Maybe an optional spi to obtain a custom container from
>> infinispan could be a good choice to add to the new
>> implementation and provide another one tool to do things
>> with better performance.
>>
>> I think the new model might solve your caching needs. There
>> will be no importing by default. This means no synching,
>> etc. Keycloak will only store metadata that your user store
>> can't provide. User Federation Providers will work just as
>> the default Keycloak user store and user cache.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tatú
>
>
>
>
> --
> Tatú
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/attachments/20160613/764297f1/attachment-0001.html
More information about the keycloak-dev
mailing list