This proposal was superseded by the routing service proposal
This document is a work-in-progress and represents a very early state of the Pods design. Significant aspects are not documented, though we expect to add them in the future. This is one possible architecture for Pods, and we intend to contrast this with alternatives before deciding which approach to implement. This documentation will be kept even if we decide not to implement this so that we can document the reasons for not choosing this approach.
Proposal: Stateless Router using Requests Buffering
We will decompose gitlab_users
, gitlab_routes
and gitlab_admin
related
tables so that they can be shared between all cells and allow any cell to
authenticate a user and route requests to the correct cell. Cells may receive
requests for the resources they don't own, but they know how to redirect back
to the correct cell.
The router is stateless and does not read from the routes
database which
means that all interactions with the database still happen from the Rails
monolith. This architecture also supports regions by allowing for low traffic
databases to be replicated across regions.
Users are not directly exposed to the concept of Cells but instead they see different data dependent on their chosen Organization. Organizations will be a new entity introduced to enforce isolation in the application and allow us to decide which request routes to which Cell, since an Organization can only be on a single Cell.
Differences
The main difference between this proposal and the one with learning routes is that this proposal always sends requests to any of the Cells. If the requests cannot be processed, the requests will be bounced back with relevant headers. This requires that request to be buffered. It allows that request decoding can be either via URI or Body of request by Rails. This means that each request might be sent more than once and be processed more than once as result.
The with learning routes proposal requires that routable information is always encoded in URI, and the router sends a pre-flight request.
Summary in diagrams
This shows how a user request routes via DNS to the nearest router and the router chooses a cell to send the request to.
graph TD;
user((User));
dns[DNS];
router_us(Router);
router_eu(Router);
cell_us0{Cell US0};
cell_us1{Cell US1};
cell_eu0{Cell EU0};
cell_eu1{Cell EU1};
user-->dns;
dns-->router_us;
dns-->router_eu;
subgraph Europe
router_eu-->cell_eu0;
router_eu-->cell_eu1;
end
subgraph United States
router_us-->cell_us0;
router_us-->cell_us1;
end
More detail
This shows that the router can actually send requests to any cell. The user will get the closest router to them geographically.
graph TD;
user((User));
dns[DNS];
router_us(Router);
router_eu(Router);
cell_us0{Cell US0};
cell_us1{Cell US1};
cell_eu0{Cell EU0};
cell_eu1{Cell EU1};
user-->dns;
dns-->router_us;
dns-->router_eu;
subgraph Europe
router_eu-->cell_eu0;
router_eu-->cell_eu1;
end
subgraph United States
router_us-->cell_us0;
router_us-->cell_us1;
end
router_eu-.->cell_us0;
router_eu-.->cell_us1;
router_us-.->cell_eu0;
router_us-.->cell_eu1;
Even more detail
This shows the databases. gitlab_users
and gitlab_routes
exist only in the
US region but are replicated to other regions. Replication does not have an
arrow because it's too hard to read the diagram.
graph TD;
user((User));
dns[DNS];
router_us(Router);
router_eu(Router);
cell_us0{Cell US0};
cell_us1{Cell US1};
cell_eu0{Cell EU0};
cell_eu1{Cell EU1};
db_gitlab_users[(gitlab_users Primary)];
db_gitlab_routes[(gitlab_routes Primary)];
db_gitlab_users_replica[(gitlab_users Replica)];
db_gitlab_routes_replica[(gitlab_routes Replica)];
db_cell_us0[(gitlab_main/gitlab_ci Cell US0)];
db_cell_us1[(gitlab_main/gitlab_ci Cell US1)];
db_cell_eu0[(gitlab_main/gitlab_ci Cell EU0)];
db_cell_eu1[(gitlab_main/gitlab_ci Cell EU1)];
user-->dns;
dns-->router_us;
dns-->router_eu;
subgraph Europe
router_eu-->cell_eu0;
router_eu-->cell_eu1;
cell_eu0-->db_cell_eu0;
cell_eu0-->db_gitlab_users_replica;
cell_eu0-->db_gitlab_routes_replica;
cell_eu1-->db_gitlab_users_replica;
cell_eu1-->db_gitlab_routes_replica;
cell_eu1-->db_cell_eu1;
end
subgraph United States
router_us-->cell_us0;
router_us-->cell_us1;
cell_us0-->db_cell_us0;
cell_us0-->db_gitlab_users;
cell_us0-->db_gitlab_routes;
cell_us1-->db_gitlab_users;
cell_us1-->db_gitlab_routes;
cell_us1-->db_cell_us1;
end
router_eu-.->cell_us0;
router_eu-.->cell_us1;
router_us-.->cell_eu0;
router_us-.->cell_eu1;
Summary of changes
- Tables related to User data (including profile settings, authentication credentials, personal access tokens) are decomposed into a
gitlab_users
schema - The
routes
table is decomposed intogitlab_routes
schema - The
application_settings
(and probably a few other instance level tables) are decomposed intogitlab_admin
schema - A new column
routes.cell_id
is added toroutes
table - A new Router service exists to choose which cell to route a request to.
- A new concept will be introduced in GitLab called an organization and a user can select a "default organization" and this will be a user level setting. The default organization is used to redirect users away from ambiguous routes like
/dashboard
to organization scoped routes like/organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
. Legacy users will have a special default organization that allows them to keep using global resources onCell US0
. All existing namespaces will initially move to this public organization. - If a cell receives a request for a
routes.cell_id
that it does not own it returns a302
withX-Gitlab-Cell-Redirect
header so that the router can send the request to the correct cell. The correct cell can also set a headerX-Gitlab-Cell-Cache
which contains information about how this request should be cached to remember the cell. For example if the request was/gitlab-org/gitlab
then the header would encode/gitlab-org/* => Cell US0
(for example, any requests starting with/gitlab-org/
can always be routed toCell US0
- When the cell does not know (from the cache) which cell to send a request to it just picks a random cell within it's region
- Writes to
gitlab_users
andgitlab_routes
are sent to a primary PostgreSQL server in ourUS
region but reads can come from replicas in the same region. This will add latency for these writes but we expect they are infrequent relative to the rest of GitLab.
Detailed explanation of default organization in the first iteration
All users will get a new column users.default_organization
which they can
control in user settings. We will introduce a concept of the
GitLab.com Public
organization. This will be set as the default organization for all existing
users. This organization will allow the user to see data from all namespaces in
Cell US0
(for example, our original GitLab.com instance). This behavior can be invisible to
existing users such that they don't even get told when they are viewing a
global page like /dashboard
that it's even scoped to an organization.
Any new users with a default organization other than GitLab.com Public
will have
a distinct user experience and will be fully aware that every page they load is
only ever scoped to a single organization. These users can never
load any global pages like /dashboard
and will end up being redirected to
/organizations/<DEFAULT_ORGANIZATION>/-/dashboard
. This may also be the case
for legacy APIs and such users may only ever be able to use APIs scoped to a
organization.
Detailed explanation of Admin Area settings
We believe that maintaining and synchronizing Admin Area settings will be
frustrating and painful so to avoid this we will decompose and share all Admin Area
settings in the gitlab_admin
schema. This should be safe (similar to other
shared schemas) because these receive very little write traffic.
In cases where different cells need different settings (for example, the
Elasticsearch URL), we will either decide to use a templated
format in the relevant application_settings
row which allows it to be dynamic
per cell. Alternatively if that proves difficult we'll introduce a new table
called per_cell_application_settings
and this will have 1 row per cell to allow
setting different settings per cell. It will still be part of the gitlab_admin
schema and shared which will allow us to centrally manage it and simplify
keeping settings in sync for all cells.
Pros
- Router is stateless and can live in many regions. We use Anycast DNS to resolve to nearest region for the user.
- Cells can receive requests for namespaces in the wrong cell and the user still gets the right response as well as caching at the router that ensures the next request is sent to the correct cell so the next request will go to the correct cell
- The majority of the code still lives in
gitlab
rails codebase. The Router doesn't actually need to understand how GitLab URLs are composed. - Since the responsibility to read and write
gitlab_users
,gitlab_routes
andgitlab_admin
still lives in Rails it means minimal changes will be needed to the Rails application compared to extracting services that need to isolate the domain models and build new interfaces. - Compared to a separate routing service this allows the Rails application to encode more complex rules around how to map URLs to the correct cell and may work for some existing API endpoints.
- All the new infrastructure (just a router) is optional and a single-cell self-managed installation does not even need to run the Router and there are no other new services.
Cons
-
gitlab_users
,gitlab_routes
andgitlab_admin
databases may need to be replicated across regions and writes need to go across regions. We need to do an analysis on write TPS for the relevant tables to determine if this is feasible. - Sharing access to the database from many different Cells means that they are all coupled at the Postgres schema level and this means changes to the database schema need to be done carefully in sync with the deployment of all Cells. This limits us to ensure that Cells are kept in closely similar versions compared to an architecture with shared services that have an API we control.
- Although most data is stored in the right region there can be requests proxied from another region which may be an issue for certain types of compliance.
- Data in
gitlab_users
andgitlab_routes
databases must be replicated in all regions which may be an issue for certain types of compliance. - The router cache may need to be very large if we get a wide variety of URLs (for example, long tail). In such a case we may need to implement a 2nd level of caching in user cookies so their frequently accessed pages always go to the right cell the first time.
- Having shared database access for
gitlab_users
andgitlab_routes
from multiple cells is an unusual architecture decision compared to extracting services that are called from multiple cells. - It is very likely we won't be able to find cacheable elements of a
GraphQL URL and often existing GraphQL endpoints are heavily dependent on
ids that won't be in the
routes
table so cells won't necessarily know what cell has the data. As such we'll probably have to update our GraphQL calls to include an organization context in the path like/api/organizations/<organization>/graphql
. - This architecture implies that implemented endpoints can only access data that are readily accessible on a given Cell, but are unlikely to aggregate information from many Cells.
- All unknown routes are sent to the latest deployment which we assume to be
Cell US0
. This is required as newly added endpoints will be only decodable by latest cell. This Cell could later redirect to correct one that can serve the given request. Since request processing might be heavy some Cells might receive significant amount of traffic due to that.
Example database configuration
Handling shared gitlab_users
, gitlab_routes
and gitlab_admin
databases, while having dedicated gitlab_main
and gitlab_ci
databases should already be handled by the way we use config/database.yml
. We should also, already be able to handle the dedicated EU replicas while having a single US primary for gitlab_users
and gitlab_routes
. Below is a snippet of part of the database configuration for the Cell architecture described above.
Cell US0
# config/database.yml
production:
main:
host: postgres-main.cell-us0.primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-main.cell-us0.replicas.consul
ci:
host: postgres-ci.cell-us0.primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-ci.cell-us0.replicas.consul
users:
host: postgres-users-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-users-replicas.us.consul
routes:
host: postgres-routes-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-routes-replicas.us.consul
admin:
host: postgres-admin-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-admin-replicas.us.consul
Cell EU0
# config/database.yml
production:
main:
host: postgres-main.cell-eu0.primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-main.cell-eu0.replicas.consul
ci:
host: postgres-ci.cell-eu0.primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-ci.cell-eu0.replicas.consul
users:
host: postgres-users-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-users-replicas.eu.consul
routes:
host: postgres-routes-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-routes-replicas.eu.consul
admin:
host: postgres-admin-primary.consul
load_balancing:
discovery: postgres-admin-replicas.eu.consul
Request flows
-
gitlab-org
is a top level namespace and lives inCell US0
in theGitLab.com Public
organization -
my-company
is a top level namespace and lives inCell EU0
in themy-organization
organization
my-organization
Experience for paying user that is part of Such a user will have a default organization set to /my-organization
and will be
unable to load any global routes outside of this organization. They may load other
projects/namespaces but their MR/Todo/Issue counts at the top of the page will
not be correctly populated in the first iteration. The user will be aware of
this limitation.
/my-company/my-project
while logged in
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- They request
/my-company/my-project
without the router cache, so the router chooses randomlyCell EU1
-
Cell EU1
does not have/my-company
, but it knows that it lives inCell EU0
so it redirects the router toCell EU0
-
Cell EU0
returns the correct response as well as setting the cache headers for the router/my-company/* => Cell EU0
- The router now caches and remembers any request paths matching
/my-company/*
should go toCell EU0
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_eu0 as Cell EU0
participant cell_eu1 as Cell EU1
user->>router_eu: GET /my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu1: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu1->>router_eu: 302 /my-company/my-project X-Gitlab-Cell-Redirect={cell:Cell EU0}
router_eu->>cell_eu0: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu0->>user: <h1>My Project... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/my-company/}
/my-company/my-project
while not logged in
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- The router does not have
/my-company/*
cached yet so it chooses randomlyCell EU1
-
Cell EU1
redirects them through a login flow - Still they request
/my-company/my-project
without the router cache, so the router chooses a random cellCell EU1
-
Cell EU1
does not have/my-company
, but it knows that it lives inCell EU0
so it redirects the router toCell EU0
-
Cell EU0
returns the correct response as well as setting the cache headers for the router/my-company/* => Cell EU0
- The router now caches and remembers any request paths matching
/my-company/*
should go toCell EU0
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_eu0 as Cell EU0
participant cell_eu1 as Cell EU1
user->>router_eu: GET /my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu1: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu1->>user: 302 /users/sign_in?redirect=/my-company/my-project
user->>router_eu: GET /users/sign_in?redirect=/my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu1: GET /users/sign_in?redirect=/my-company/my-project
cell_eu1->>user: <h1>Sign in...
user->>router_eu: POST /users/sign_in?redirect=/my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu1: POST /users/sign_in?redirect=/my-company/my-project
cell_eu1->>user: 302 /my-company/my-project
user->>router_eu: GET /my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu1: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu1->>router_eu: 302 /my-company/my-project X-Gitlab-Cell-Redirect={cell:Cell EU0}
router_eu->>cell_eu0: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu0->>user: <h1>My Project... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/my-company/}
/my-company/my-other-project
after last step
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- The router cache now has
/my-company/* => Cell EU0
, so the router choosesCell EU0
-
Cell EU0
returns the correct response as well as the cache header again
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_eu0 as Cell EU0
participant cell_eu1 as Cell EU1
user->>router_eu: GET /my-company/my-project
router_eu->>cell_eu0: GET /my-company/my-project
cell_eu0->>user: <h1>My Project... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/my-company/}
/gitlab-org/gitlab
after last step
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- The router has no cached value for this URL so randomly chooses
Cell EU0
-
Cell EU0
redirects the router toCell US0
-
Cell US0
returns the correct response as well as the cache header again
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_eu0 as Cell EU0
participant cell_us0 as Cell US0
user->>router_eu: GET /gitlab-org/gitlab
router_eu->>cell_eu0: GET /gitlab-org/gitlab
cell_eu0->>router_eu: 302 /gitlab-org/gitlab X-Gitlab-Cell-Redirect={cell:Cell US0}
router_eu->>cell_us0: GET /gitlab-org/gitlab
cell_us0->>user: <h1>GitLab.org... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/gitlab-org/}
In this case the user is not on their "default organization" so their TODO counter will not include their typical todos. We may choose to highlight this in the UI somewhere. A future iteration may be able to fetch that for them from their default organization.
/
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- Router does not have a cache for
/
route (specifically rails never tells it to cache this route) - The Router choose
Cell EU0
randomly - The Rails application knows the users default organization is
/my-organization
, so it redirects the user to/organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
- The Router has a cached value for
/organizations/my-organization/*
so it then sends the request toPOD EU0
-
Cell EU0
serves up a new page/organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
which is the same dashboard view we have today but scoped to an organization clearly in the UI - The user is (optionally) presented with a message saying that data on this page is only from their default organization and that they can change their default organization if it's not right.
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_eu0 as Cell EU0
user->>router_eu: GET /
router_eu->>cell_eu0: GET /
cell_eu0->>user: 302 /organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
user->>router: GET /organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
router->>cell_eu0: GET /organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
cell_eu0->>user: <h1>My Company Dashboard... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/organizations/my-organization/}
/dashboard
Navigates to As above, they will end up on /organizations/my-organization/-/dashboard
as
the rails application will already redirect /
to the dashboard page.
/not-my-company/not-my-project
while logged in (but they don't have access since this project/group is private)
Navigates to - User is in Europe so DNS resolves to the router in Europe
- The router knows that
/not-my-company
lives inCell US1
so sends the request to this - The user does not have access so
Cell US1
returns 404
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_eu as Router EU
participant cell_us1 as Cell US1
user->>router_eu: GET /not-my-company/not-my-project
router_eu->>cell_us1: GET /not-my-company/not-my-project
cell_us1->>user: 404
Creates a new top level namespace
The user will be asked which organization they want the namespace to belong to.
If they select my-organization
then it will end up on the same cell as all
other namespaces in my-organization
. If they select nothing we default to
GitLab.com Public
and it is clear to the user that this is isolated from
their existing organization such that they won't be able to see data from both
on a single page.
/gitlab-org
Experience for GitLab team member that is part of Such a user is considered a legacy user and has their default organization set to
GitLab.com Public
. This is a "meta" organization that does not really exist but
the Rails application knows to interpret this organization to mean that they are
allowed to use legacy global functionality like /dashboard
to see data across
namespaces located on Cell US0
. The rails backend also knows that the default cell to render any ambiguous
routes like /dashboard
is Cell US0
. Lastly the user will be allowed to
navigate to organizations on another cell like /my-organization
but when they do the
user will see a message indicating that some data may be missing (for example, the
MRs/Issues/Todos) counts.
/gitlab-org/gitlab
while not logged in
Navigates to - User is in the US so DNS resolves to the US router
- The router knows that
/gitlab-org
lives inCell US0
so sends the request to this cell -
Cell US0
serves up the response
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_us as Router US
participant cell_us0 as Cell US0
user->>router_us: GET /gitlab-org/gitlab
router_us->>cell_us0: GET /gitlab-org/gitlab
cell_us0->>user: <h1>GitLab.org... X-Gitlab-Cell-Cache={path_prefix:/gitlab-org/}
/
Navigates to - User is in US so DNS resolves to the router in US
- Router does not have a cache for
/
route (specifically rails never tells it to cache this route) - The Router chooses
Cell US1
randomly - The Rails application knows the users default organization is
GitLab.com Public
, so it redirects the user to/dashboards
(only legacy users can see/dashboard
global view) - Router does not have a cache for
/dashboard
route (specifically rails never tells it to cache this route) - The Router chooses
Cell US1
randomly - The Rails application knows the users default organization is
GitLab.com Public
, so it allows the user to load/dashboards
(only legacy users can see/dashboard
global view) and redirects to router the legacy cell which isCell US0
-
Cell US0
serves up the global view dashboard page/dashboard
which is the same dashboard view we have today
sequenceDiagram
participant user as User
participant router_us as Router US
participant cell_us0 as Cell US0
participant cell_us1 as Cell US1
user->>router_us: GET /
router_us->>cell_us1: GET /
cell_us1->>user: 302 /dashboard
user->>router_us: GET /dashboard
router_us->>cell_us1: GET /dashboard
cell_us1->>router_us: 302 /dashboard X-Gitlab-Cell-Redirect={cell:Cell US0}
router_us->>cell_us0: GET /dashboard
cell_us0->>user: <h1>Dashboard...
/my-company/my-other-project
while logged in (but they don't have access since this project is private)
Navigates to They get a 404.
Experience for non-authenticated users
Flow is similar to authenticated users except global routes like /dashboard
will
redirect to the login page as there is no default organization to choose from.
A new customers signs up
They will be asked if they are already part of an organization or if they'd
like to create one. If they choose neither they end up no the default
GitLab.com Public
organization.
An organization is moved from 1 cell to another
TODO
GraphQL/API requests which don't include the namespace in the URL
TODO
The autocomplete suggestion functionality in the search bar which remembers recent issues/MRs
TODO
Global search
TODO
Administrator
/admin
page
Loads - Router picks a random cell
Cell US0
- Cell US0 redirects user to
/admin/cells/cellus0
- Cell US0 renders an Admin Area page and also returns a cache header to cache
/admin/cellss/cellus0/* => Cell US0
. The Admin Area page contains a dropdown list showing other cells they could select and it changes the query parameter.
Admin Area settings in Postgres are all shared across all cells to avoid divergence but we still make it clear in the URL and UI which cell is serving the Admin Area page as there is dynamic data being generated from these pages and the operator may want to view a specific cell.
More Technical Problems To Solve
Replicating User Sessions Between All Cells
Today user sessions live in Redis but each cell will have their own Redis instance. We already use a dedicated Redis instance for sessions so we could consider sharing this with all cells like we do with gitlab_users
PostgreSQL database. But an important consideration will be latency as we would still want to mostly fetch sessions from the same region.
An alternative might be that user sessions get moved to a JWT payload that encodes all the session data but this has downsides. For example, it is difficult to expire a user session, when their password changes or for other reasons, if the session lives in a JWT controlled by the user.
How do we migrate between Cells
Migrating data between cells will need to factor all data stores:
- PostgreSQL
- Redis Shared State
- Gitaly
- Elasticsearch
Is it still possible to leak the existence of private groups via a timing attack?
If you have router in EU, and you know that EU router by default redirects to EU located Cells, you know their latency (lets assume 10 ms). Now, if your request is bounced back and redirected to US which has different latency (lets assume that roundtrip will be around 60 ms) you can deduce that 404 was returned by US Cell and know that your 404 is in fact 403.
We may defer this until we actually implement a cell in a different region. Such timing attacks are already theoretically possible with the way we do permission checks today but the timing difference is probably too small to be able to detect.
One technique to mitigate this risk might be to have the router add a random delay to any request that returns 404 from a cell.
Should runners be shared across all cells?
We have 2 options and we should decide which is easier:
- Decompose runner registration and queuing tables and share them across all cells. This may have implications for scalability, and we'd need to consider if this would include group/project runners as this may have scalability concerns as these are high traffic tables that would need to be shared.
- Runners are registered per-cell and, we probably have a separate fleet of runners for every cell or just register the same runners to many cells which may have implications for queueing
How do we guarantee unique ids across all cells for things that cannot conflict?
This project assumes at least namespaces and projects have unique ids across all cells as many requests need to be routed based on their ID. Since those tables are across different databases then guaranteeing a unique ID will require a new solution. There are likely other tables where unique IDs are necessary and depending on how we resolve routing for GraphQL and other APIs and other design goals it may be determined that we want the primary key to be unique for all tables.