On 27/03/2019 15:59, Buterbaugh, Kevin L wrote:
[SNIP]
So am I missing something?
Nope you are not missing anything. Setting NFSv4 ACL's on GPFS on
*LINUX* has always been a steaming pile of Brontosaurus droppings.
I have been on about since 2011... Search the mailing list archives.
Is
mmeditacl passes a temporary file containing the ACLs to $EDITOR.
You can write $EDITOR if you want. :)
--
Stephen
> On Mar 27, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Buterbaugh, Kevin L
> mailto:kevin.buterba...@vanderbilt.edu>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Thanks for the response. I did look at
I'm the author of the presentation.
I'll bow to Tomer's knowledge about how the internals of Spectrum Scale
(GPFS) work.
I've been working with GPFS since V1.3 so it was a bit of a shock to think
I had a fundamental misunderstanding.
In this case both viewpoints are actually equivalent
Hi Kevin,
Small script herewith (append.acl.sh ) - appends one group ace
(append.acl) to all the files/dirs under .
You may try it for small directory first to check it's usefulness in your
case.
(tried along the same lines as discussed by others - mmgetacl, append then
mmputacl).
$ cat
I think I gave an internal link. Try this instead:
http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=ibm10716323
Nate Falk
IBM Spectrum Scale Level 2 Support
Software Defined Infrastructure, IBM Systems
E-mail: nf...@us.ibm.com
Find me on:
From: "Nathan Falk"
To: gpfsug main
Hello Kevin,
No, you're not missing something. GPFS doesn't provide a means of
recursively modifying ACLs. It's not even all that easy to just modify one
ACL for one file (it's either mmeditacl, or mmgetacl > /tmp/acl.txt; vi
/tmp/acl.txt; mmputacl -i /tmp/acl.txt).
I've had a few queries
This is going to be difficult, regardless of the tool used. And it's made worse
by inheritance not flowing automatically to existing files and directories.
--
Jonathan Fosburgh
Principal Application Systems Analyst
IT Operations Storage Team
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
I have a python module that I am nearing the completion of for a project that
wraps all of that. It also contains another python script for the easy
manipulation of the ACLs from the command line. Once I have that wraped up,
hopefully this week, I would be happy to share.
Chad
--
Chad Kerner
Unless you have CES and SMB in which case you have to set -k nfs4. Well
technically you can set it, create a share and then set it back. But then you
can't create more shares.
AFAIK SMB actually understands the POSIX ACL and represents it to Windows in
some way (just don't try and change it
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks. We have done a very similar thing when we’re dealing with a situation
where: 1) all files and directories in the fileset are starting out with the
same existing ACL, and 2) all need the same modification made to them.
Unfortunately, in this situation item 2 is true, but
I misunderstood you.
Pretty much what we've been doing is maintaining "ACL template" files based on
how our filesystem hierarchy is set up. Basically, fileset foo has a foo.acl
file that contains what the ACL is supposed to be. If we need to change the
ACL, we modify that file with the new
I don’t have a solution, just similar experience with mmputacl vs setfacl.
IMO, needing to dump and reapply full ACLs rather than just specifying what is
to be added is one of a few reasons mmputacl is inferior to setfacl. We do all
our extended ACL manipulation with setfacl from a gpfs native
unfortunately .. commands like nfs4_setfacl
are not implemented yet in GPFS
I once helped me out with a local NFS
mount to set ACLs automated ... then you can use NFSv4 client to do the
ACL stuff .. From:
"Buterbaugh, Kevin
L" To:
gpfsug main discussion
list Date:
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for the response. I did look at mmeditacl, but unless I’m missing
something it’s interactive (kind of like mmedquota is by default). If I had
only a handful of files / directories to modify that would be fine, but in this
case there are thousands of ACL’s that need
Hi,
Not sure how will it work over the mailing list...
Since its a popular question, I've prepared a slide explaining all of that
- ( pasted/attached below, but I'll try to explain in text as well...).
On the right we can see the various "layers":
- OS disks ( what looks to the OS/GPFS as a
Try mmeditacl.
--
Jonathan Fosburgh
Principal Application Systems Analyst
IT Operations Storage Team
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
(713) 745-9346
[1553012336789_download]
From: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org
on behalf of
Hi All,
First off, I have very limited experience with GPFS ACL’s, so please forgive me
if I’m missing something obvious here. AFAIK, this is the first time we’ve hit
something like this…
We have a fileset where all the files / directories have GPFS NFSv4 ACL’s set
on them. However, unlike
Hmmm… I was going to ask what structures are actually shared by "two" pools
that are in different file systems, and you provided the answer before I asked.
So all disks which are labelled with a particular storage pool name share some
metadata: pool id, the name, possibly other items. I was
mmlspool might suggest there's only 1 system pool per cluster. We have 2
clusters and it has id=0 on both.
One of our clusters has 2 filesystems that have same id for two different
dataonly pools:
[root@cl001 ~]# mmlspool home all
NameId
system 0
fc_8T65537
This presentation contains lots of good information about file system structure
in general, and GPFS in specific, and I appreciate that and enjoyed reading it.
However, it states outright (both graphically and in text) that storage pools
are a feature of the cluster, not of a file system —
Kevin you are correct, it is one "system" storage pool per file system not cluster.
Fred__Fred Stock | IBM Pittsburgh Lab | 720-430-8821sto...@us.ibm.com
- Original message -From: "Buterbaugh, Kevin L" Sent by:
Hi All,
So I was looking at the presentation referenced below and it states - on
multiple slides - that there is one system storage pool per cluster. Really?
Shouldn’t that be one system storage pool per filesystem?!? If not, please
explain how in my GPFS cluster with two (local)
The requirements for GUI & ReST API aren't actually that dramatic. It boils down to three things:
1) CCR. This is part of the base package but you need to migrate you config from server based to CCR which comes with the added benefit that your cluster config is now truly HA.
2)
On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 09:52 +, Robert Horton wrote:
> I don't know the answer to your actual question, but have you thought
> about using the REST-API rather than parsing the command outputs? I
> can
> send over the Python stuff we're using if you mail me off list.
Thanks, We don't currently
24 matches
Mail list logo
