Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How do I describe all users using the admin client? #1616

Closed
3 of 7 tasks
donovanbai-dd opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1630
Closed
3 of 7 tasks

How do I describe all users using the admin client? #1616

donovanbai-dd opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1630
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@donovanbai-dd
Copy link

donovanbai-dd commented Jul 27, 2023

Description

The describe_user_scram_credentials method was added to the admin client recently but I'm unable to find a way to describe all users. The equivalent Kafka CLI command for what I'm trying to do is kafka-configs.sh --describe --entity-type users. I also see that librdkafka supports this functionality https://github.com/confluentinc/librdkafka/blob/7cc860d4d099bfe4c53f60950189ea139a660128/src/rdkafka.h#L8716-L8717

How to reproduce

I tried passing in an empty user list but it doesn't work

admin_client.describe_user_scram_credentials([]) # just returns empty map

Checklist

Please provide the following information:

  • confluent-kafka-python and librdkafka version (confluent_kafka.version() and confluent_kafka.libversion()): ('2.2.0', 33685504) and ('2.2.0', 33685759)
  • Apache Kafka broker version: 3.3.1
  • Client configuration: {...}
  • Operating system: Mac
  • Provide client logs (with 'debug': '..' as necessary)
  • Provide broker log excerpts
  • Critical issue
@mahajanadhitya
Copy link
Contributor

Will get the bug fix for Python Client merged quickly, merging may take extra 2 days. Will get back soon.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants