From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Barton Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:31:50 -0000 Subject: [Lustre-devel] OST pool administration (was RE: Stripe offset default) In-Reply-To: <4FE51862-3264-4248-948F-CF70C56FD8AD@xyratex.com> References: <016b01cb8b32$cc3a9c90$64afd5b0$@com> <4FE51862-3264-4248-948F-CF70C56FD8AD@xyratex.com> Message-ID: <01b501cb8bdb$f3ff3ac0$dbfdb040$@com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org Peter, > The proposal for acl / Group / users violates Posix, and may lead > to results users don't expect. Sgid directories and inheritance > on ACLs are safer I think. This should probably be in a separate thread since I was trying to make a case for improving the administration storage pools (the classic gold/silver/bronze scenarios) which is really different from the default file layout issue. If the default layout in a directory creates files in the "gold" OST pool but the user has no permissions for that pool, then returning EPERM on file creation would potentially be inconsistent with the permissions on the directory itself. Is this what you meant by being inconsistent with Posix? If so, I'm afraid I don't follow the point about sgid. I guess using per-pool quotas rather than permissions might be more natural. I'd be interested to hear people's opinions... Cheers, Eric