Pointing multiple projects' log sinks to one bucket - google-cloud-platform

I have a few GCP projects with log sinks to different storage buckets. I'd like to combine them into a single bucket. But the stackdriver export doesn't add any distinguishing information to the object names it creates; they all look like cloudaudit.googleapis.com/activity/2017/11/14/00:00:00_00:59:59_S0.json
What will happen if I start pushing them all to a single bucket? Will the different project sinks overwrite each other's objects? Is there any way to distinguish which project created the logs just from the object?
If not, I guess I should switch to pubsub sinks, and then write some code that produces objects with more desirable names. Are there any established patterns or examples for doing this?
Update: I filed https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/69371200 for this issue.

To enable this, just select custom destination on the sink and point to the bucket with this format: storage.googleapis.com/[BUCKET_ID].
I've just enabled this in a couple of my projects, as I'm curious to see the results when exporting to a bucket. However, I have been using a single BQ sink for all my projects, and the tables created have all the logs mixed, so no logs lost when using a single BQ sink.
I'm assuming for a GCS sink will work in the same way, but I'll tell you in a couple of days.
If a single bucket sink does not work, you can always use a single BQ sink (that will help in analyzing the logs), and when you no longer want to have them in BQ, export them and store the files wherever you want.
Also, since you'll be writing to your sink constantly, you can't use nearline or coldline, so the storage pricing is better in BQ than a regional bucket (0.02 USD/GB in BQ vs somewhere between 0.02 and 0.35 USD/GB for regional storage, depending on the region; BQ has 10GB free monthly, GCS 5GB).
I would generally recommend using a BQ sink, but I'll tell you what happens with my bucket logs.
Update:
A few hours later, and I've verified that shared bucket sinks work pretty much as you would expect. It concatenates logs chronologically regardless of the project origin, and only creates a single file for each time window. Hope this helps! (I still prefer BQ as a log sink...)
Update 2:
For the behavior you seek in the feature request, I would use BQ, but you could just as easily grep the project ID and separate the logs:
grep '"logName":"projects/<your-project-id>/' mixed-log.json > single-project-log.json
Or just get a cloud function triggered by bucket updates (so, every time you receive a log file in the sink) to run this for you.
Or namespace you buckets and have a cloud function moving them to wherever you need as soon as they are written.
The possibilities are endless!

If you have an organization or folder which includes all the projects that you want to collect logs from, then you can create a sink that collects from all projects in that org/folder.
Unfortunatlely, you cannot do this from the Cloud Console. Instead you must use gcloud with the --organization or --folder option or the API.

Related

Putting a TWS file dependencies on AWS S3 stored file

I have an ETL application which is suppose to migrate to AWS infra. The scheduler being used in my application is Tivoli Work Scheduler and we want to use the same on cloud as well which has file dependencies.
Now when we move to aws , the files to be watched will land in S3 Bucket. Can we put the OPEN dependency for files in S3? If yes, What would be the hostname ( HOST#Filepath ) ?
If Not, what services should be aligned to serve the purpose. I have both time as well as file dependency in my SCHEDULES.
Eg. The file might get uploaded on S3 at 1AM. AT 3 AM my schedule will get triggered, look for the file in S3 bucket. If present, starts execution and if not then it should wait as per other parameters on tws.
Any help or advice would be nice to have.
If I understand this correctly, job triggered at 3am will identify all files uploaded within last e.g. 24 hours.
You can list all s3 files to list everything uploaded within specific period of time.
Better solution would be to create S3 upload trigger which will send information to SQS and have your code inspect the depth (number of messages) there and start processing the files one by one. An additional benefit would be an assurance that all items are processed without having to worry about time overalpse.

Export DynamoDB table to S3 automatically

The scenario is the following: I have a lambda function that does an http request to get the data of today and the last 365 days and stores them in DynamoDB. The function is triggered every day at 8am, so the most recent data is always saved in the DynamoDB table.
Now my goal is to export the DynamoDB table to a S3 file automatically on an everyday basis as well, so I'm able to use services like QuickSight, Athena, Forecast on the data.
If possible and easily implementable, I'd like to only have one S3 file that gets added with the most recent data of the day, because an extra file everyday seems kinda pricey. If that's not possible, an extra file everyday would also be fine.
What's the best way to go about doing so without using CLI (because I'm not allowed to install programs to my laptop) and without using Lambda (because I wouldn't know how to write a function for that without any tutorials)?
Take a look at DataPipeline. This is a use case and most of the configuration is simple.
It will also not require any knowledge of Lambda and can be automated.
More info: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/DynamoDBPipeline.html
DynamoDB recently released a new, native feature to export your table's data to an S3 bucket. It supports exporting into DynamoDB JSON and Amazon Ion - see the documentation on how to use it at:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/DataExport.html
This will enable you to run whatever analytics tools you'd like (Athena, etc.) on the data exported in S3.

Splunk migration to S3 DataLake

We're looking at moving away from Splunk as our datastore and looking at AWS Data Lake backed by S3.
What would be the process of migrating data from Splunk to S3? I've read lots of documents talking about archiving data from Splunk to S3 but not sure if this archives the data as a usable format OR if its in some archive format that needs to be restored to splunk itself?
Check out Splunk's SmartStore feature. It moves your non-hot buckets to S3 so you save storage costs. Running SmartStore on AWS only makes sense, however, if you run Splunk on AWS. Otherwise, the data export charges will bankrupt you. Data export applies when Splunk needs to search a bucket that's stored in S3 and so copies that bucket to an indexer. See https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/8.0.0/Indexer/AboutSmartStore for more information.
From what I've read there are a couple of ways to do it:
Export using the Web UI
Export using REST API Endpoint
Export using CLI
Copy certain files in the filesystem
So far I've tried using the CLI to export and I've managed to export around 500,000 events at a time using
splunk search "index=main earliest=11/11/2019:00:00:01 latest=11/15/2019:23:59:59" -output rawdata -maxout 500000 > output2.dmp
However - I'm not sure how I can accurately repeat this step to make sure I include all 100 million+ events. IE search from DATE A to DATE B for 500,000 records, then search from DATE B to DATE C for the next 500,000 - without missing any events inbetween.

Copying objects from one bucket directory folder to another bucket folder using transfer

I'm wanting to use google transfer to copy all folders/files in a specific directory in Bucket-1 to the root directory of Bucket-2.
Have tried to use transfer with the filter option but doesn't copy anything across.
Any pointers on getting this to work within transfer or step by step for functions would be really appreciated.
I reproduced your issue and worked for me using gsutil.
For example:
gsutil cp -r gs://SourceBucketName/example.txt gs://DestinationBucketName
Furthermore, I tried to copy using Transfer option and it also worked. The steps I have done with Transfer option are these:
1 - Create new Transfer Job
Panel: “Select Source”:
2 - Select your source for example Google Cloud Storage bucket
3 - Select your bucket with the data which you want to copy.
4 - On the field “Transfer files with these prefixes” add your data (I used “example.txt”)
Panel “Select destination”:
5 - Select your destination Bucket
Panel “Configure transfer”:
6 - Run now if you want to complete the transfer now.
7 - Press “Create”.
For more information about copy from a bucket to another you can check the official documentation.
So, a few things to consider here:
You have to keep in mind that Google Cloud Storage buckets don’t treat subdirectories the way you would expect. To the bucket it is basically all part of the file name. You can find more information about that in the How Subdirectories Work documentation.
The previous is also the reason why you cannot transfer a file that is inside a “directory” and expect to see only the file’s name appear in the root of your targeted bucket. To give you an example:
If you have a file at gs://my-bucket/my-bucket-subdirectory/myfile.txt, once you transfer it to your second bucket it will still have the subdirectory in its name, so the result will be: gs://my-second-bucket/my-bucket-subdirectory/myfile.txt
This is why, If you are interested in automating this process, you should definitely give the Google Cloud Storage Client Libraries a try.
Additionally, you could also use the GCS Client with Google Cloud Functions. However, I would just suggest this if you really need the Event Triggers offered by GCF. If you just want the transfer to run regularly, for example on a cron job, you could still use the GCS Client somewhere other than a Cloud Function.
The Cloud Storage Tutorial might give you a good example of how to handle Storage events.
Also, on your future posts, try to provide as much relevant information as possible. For this post, as an example, it would’ve been nice to know what file structure you have on your buckets and what you have been getting as an output. And If you can provide straight away what’s your use case, it will also prevent other users from suggesting solutions that don’t apply to your needs.
try this in Cloud Shell in the project
gsutil cp -r gs://bucket1/foldername gs://bucket2

"Realtime" syncing of large numbers of log files to S3

I have a large number of logfiles from a service that I need to regularly run analysis on via EMR/Hive. There are thousands of new files per day, and they can technically come out of order relative to the file name (e.g. a batch of files comes a week after the date in the file name).
I did an initial load of the files via Snowball, then set up a script that syncs the entire directory tree once per day using the 'aws s3 sync' cli command. This is good enough for now, but I will need a more realtime solution in the near future. The issue with this approach is that it takes a very long time, on the order of 30 minutes per day. And using a ton of bandwidth all at once! I assume this is because it needs to scan the entire directory tree to determine what files are new, then sends them all at once.
A realtime solution would be beneficial in 2 ways. One, I can get the analysis I need without waiting up to a day. Two, the network use would be lower and more spread out, instead of spiking once a day.
It's clear that 'aws s3 sync' isn't the right tool here. Has anyone dealt with a similar situation?
One potential solution could be:
Set up a service on the log-file side that continuously syncs (or aws s3 cp) new files based on the modified date. But wouldn't that need to scan the whole directory tree on the log server as well?
For reference, the log-file directory structure is like:
/var/log/files/done/{year}/{month}/{day}/{source}-{hour}.txt
There is also a /var/log/files/processing/ directory for files being written to.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!
You could have a Lambda function triggered automatically as a new object is saved on your S3 bucket. Check Using AWS Lambda with Amazon S3 for details. The event passed to the Lambda function will contain the file name, allowing you to target only the new files in the syncing process.
If you'd like wait until you have, say 1,000 files, in order to sync in batch, you could use AWS SQS and the following workflow (using 2 Lambda functions, 1 CloudWatch rule and 1 SQS queue):
S3 invokes Lambda whenever there's a new file to sync
Lambda stores the filename in SQS
CloudWatch triggers another Lambda function every X minutes/hours to check how many files are there in SQS for syncing. Once there's 1,000 or more, it retrieves those filenames and run the syncing process.
Keep in mind that Lambda has a hard timeout of 5 minutes. If you sync job takes too long, you'll need to break it in smaller chunks.
You could set the bucket up to log HTTP requests to a separate bucket, then parse the log to look for newly created files and their paths. One troublespot, as well as PUT requests, you have to look for the multipart upload ops which are a sequence of POSTs. Best to log for a few days to see what gets created before putting any effort in to this approach