grpc-proxy doesn't respect --keys-only flag

[pjjw]

Investigating the use of the grpc-proxy, I get different results for the same etcdctl command when going through the proxy vs. going direct to the etcd cluster- specifically, the --keys-only flag is ignored.

I'm running the grpc proxy with the following command:

pwoodman@mk8s01-dca1:~/etcd/etcd-v3.2.6-linux-amd64$ ./etcd grpc-proxy start --endpoints=http://m3-kv02-dca1:2379
2017-08-31 22:21:17.272813 I | etcdmain: listening for grpc-proxy client requests on 127.0.0.1:23790
2017-08-31 22:21:17.289372 E | etcdmain: forgot to set Type=notify in systemd service file?

I'd expect the following two commands to return the same result, but they don't:

pwoodman@mk8s01-dca1:~/etcd/etcd-v3.2.6-linux-amd64$ ETCDCTL_API=3 ./etcdctl --endpoints=http://m3-kv02-dca1:2379 get --keys-only --prefix "_sd.metadata"
_sd.metadata/hist_production_1r/statsdex_m3dbnode

_sd.metadata/hist_production_5f/statsdex_m3dbnode

_sd.metadata/integration_dca1/statsdex_m3dbnode

_sd.metadata/meta/statsdex_m3dbingester

_sd.metadata/meta/statsdex_m3dbnode

_sd.metadata/production/statsdex_m3dbingester

_sd.metadata/production/statsdex_m3dbnode

_sd.metadata/production_hist_backfill/statsdex_m3dbnode

pwoodman@mk8s01-dca1:~/etcd/etcd-v3.2.6-linux-amd64$ ETCDCTL_API=3 ./etcdctl --endpoints=http://localhost:23790 get --keys-only --prefix "_sd.metadata"
_sd.metadata/hist_production_1r/statsdex_m3dbnode
�0������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/hist_production_5f/statsdex_m3dbnode
�0������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/integration_dca1/statsdex_m3dbnode
�0������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/meta/statsdex_m3dbingester
�G������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/meta/statsdex_m3dbnode
�G������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/production/statsdex_m3dbingester
�0������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/production/statsdex_m3dbnode
�0������ȯ�%
_sd.metadata/production_hist_backfill/statsdex_m3dbnode
�0������ȯ�%
pwoodman@mk8s01-dca1:~/etcd/etcd-v3.2.6-linux-amd64$

[xiang90]

@pjjw Probably a bug. Would you like to help to get it fixed?

[pjjw]

lmk what's needed.

…

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 6:26 PM Xiang Li ***@***.***> wrote: @pjjw <https://github.com/pjjw> Probably a bug. Would you like to help to get it fixed? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#8478 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACfu9L2zpGRyIIShvwHDCU3mYgR8LTks5sdzMIgaJpZM4PJe_i> .