[OpenAFS] Re: fs setacl and permissions

[Christopher D. Clausen]

Todd M. Lewis <utoddl@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>>> I see a need for both solutions.  Would it be possible to change the
>>> behaviour on a per-fileserver basis?  That you could allow one
>>> scenario on volumes on fileserver a and allow the other on
>>> fileserver b. Perhaps a flag to the fileserver on start-up to select 
>>> which method
>>> the cell admin would like?
>>
>> the problem is the right way is per-volume, but per-fileserver is
>> probably the best we can do today. anyone want to code it? (i can
>> code it, it's like 5 minutes work, but testing is a little more)
>
> Is this really a good idea? Will vos move give a warning when moving a
> volume from one flavor of server to another? What happens when a
> server is rebooted with the flag switched? Would we need some kind of
> flag on the volume itself to say what kind of behavior is expected?
> This may be a 5 minute change, but recovery may take years. Maybe
> with a little more thought we can come up with a way to get the
> specific desired behavior without making multiple flavors of file
> servers (and avoid the resulting confusion that will ensue).

We'll, you already have "multiple fileserver flavors" right now.  You 
can compile enabling fast-restarts, or not and many otehr options.  I 
would imagine that a run-time flag is less confusing than a compile time 
option.  Or even the namei vs. inode fileserver.  I bet that causes even 
more problems if you run on the wrong type of vice partition.

Also, if you don't want the feature, don't use it.  I expect that the 
default behaviour will not change.

I'd rather see something that allows people to migrate off of 1.2, but 
maintain compatibility with volume "a" access were needed than to wait 2 
years for something to be designed properly.  (Not to say that a proper 
solution shouldn't be designed, just that it shouldn't stop the current 
quick fix from going forward either.)

<<CDC