Hello, Yes it's safe. Ignore_fileclass rules have the priority over other policy rules.
Regards, Thomas > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Matthew BETTINGER [mailto:matthew.bettin...@external.total.com] > Envoyé : mardi 14 janvier 2020 23:07 > À : robinhood-support@lists.sourceforge.net > Objet : [robinhood-support] Nested fileclass behavior > > Hello, > > (running latest robinhood release on centos) > > I'm trying to prevent deletion of a subdirectory on system that falls under a > cleanfiles area. What is the proper way to do this to ensure this will not > be > deleted ? > > Here is what we are doing. > > I have a file class like this > > fileclass scratch { > definition { tree == "/lustre/scratch" } > } > > > Then we run clean_files on this area like > > rule clean_files { > target_fileclass = scratch; > condition { last_access > 14d } > } > } > > > > If I make a fileclass like > > fileclass scratch_foo { > definition { tree == "/lustre/scratch/foo" } > > } > > And add that to ignore_fileclass = scratch_foo > > Will that get preserved even though it exists under /lustre/scratch which > runs > clean_files? > > Thanks, worst case is I can just make a protected area outside of > /lustre/scratch as this is going to be a monthslong run job and last thing we > need is for stuff, this stuff to be deleted =] > > Matt > > > > _______________________________________________ > robinhood-support mailing list > robinhood-support@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robinhood-support _______________________________________________ robinhood-support mailing list robinhood-support@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robinhood-support
