gluster-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gluster-devel] [PATCH v9] vfs_glusterfs: Samba VFS module for glust


From: Anand Avati
Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] [PATCH v9] vfs_glusterfs: Samba VFS module for glusterfs
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 16:32:41 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6

On 5/29/13 3:47 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 15:37 -0700, Anand Avati wrote:
On 5/29/13 3:27 PM, Anand Avati wrote:
On 05/29/2013 07:21 AM, Anand Avati wrote:
Implement a Samba VFS plugin for glusterfs based on gluster's gfapi.
This is a "bottom" vfs plugin (not something to be stacked on top of
another module), and translates (most) calls into closest actions
on gfapi.
Anand before we push this in samba I would like to have an answer about
access control.

I have tried to find out exactly how access control is handled but the
code is complex.

However what I found so far is not encouraging.

I see things like:

#define GF_MAX_AUX_GROUPS 200

and then in syncop_create_frame() that value is used to cap the max
number of auxiliary groups.

In Linux the max number of auxiliary groups is 65536 and we have seen
easily 2k auxiliary groups attached to a user in Windows domains.

Currently it is artificially limited to a number. I will work on making
this dynamic. However this will be a completely internal change to
glusterfs with no changes in either API or vfs_glusterfs. Thanks for the
feedback.

I have started working on this. Can we interpret this as a limitation of
glusterfs, rather than an issue with the VFS module?

Let me know if there are any blockers for the merge.

What it might mean is that we want the minimum version we accept via
pkg-config raised, as it's going to be very difficult to configure test
for (unless you happen to expose that in a public header).

That kind of thing leads to all manner of subtle bugs (I've spent days
on them personally).



Andrew,
The pkg-config dependency number used in the v9 patch is for the yet unreleased glusterfs version. The API number 4 will be published in the next glusterfs (3.4.0) release. Support for large group list is already in review - http://review.gluster.org/5111/ and will be part of the next release. Since we are doing the integration off git repos of both projects, the dependency version is still fuzzy.

Is this still considered a blocker?

Avati




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]