From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wido den Hollander Subject: Re: 'Immutable bit' on pools to prevent deletion Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:11:12 +0100 Message-ID: <54BA5F70.9050005@42on.com> References: <54B7D2D6.4020503@42on.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from websrv.42on.com ([31.25.102.167]:43375 "EHLO websrv.42on.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752425AbbAQNLO (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2015 08:11:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alex Elsayed , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On 01/17/2015 03:31 AM, Alex Elsayed wrote: > Wido den Hollander wrote: > > >> Is it a sane thing to look at 'features' which pools could have? Other >> features which might be set on a pool: >> >> - Read Only (all write operations return -EPERM) >> - Delete Protected > > There's another pool feature I'd find very useful: a WORM flag, that permits > only create & append (at the RADOS level, not the RBD level as was an > Emperor blueprint). > Yes, that seems like a good addition. If we introduce the system of 'flags' for pools such a flag could be implemented as well. > In particular, I'd _love_ being able to make something that takes Postgres > WAL logs and puts them in such a pool, providing real guarantees re: > consistency. Similarly, audit logs and such for compliance. > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Wido den Hollander 42on B.V. Ceph trainer and consultant Phone: +31 (0)20 700 9902 Skype: contact42on