Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Metadata space usage NFS4 vs POSIX ACL

2019-05-07 Thread Jonathan Buzzard
On Tue, 2019-05-07 at 14:35 +, Peter Childs wrote: [SNIP] > It gets slightly more annoying as nfs4-setfacl does not work with > Spectrum Scale and you have to use mmputacl which has no recursive > flag, I even found a ibm article from a few years ago saying the best > way to set acls is to

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Metadata space usage NFS4 vs POSIX ACL

2019-05-07 Thread Marc A Kaplan
2TB of extra meta data space for 100M files with ACLS?! I think that would be 20KB per file! Does seem there's some mistake here. Perhaps 2GB ? or 20GB? I don't see how we get to 2TeraBytes! ALSO, IIRC GPFS is supposed to use an ACL scheme where identical ACLs are stored once and each file

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Metadata space usage NFS4 vs POSIX ACL

2019-05-07 Thread Peter Childs
On Sat, 2019-04-06 at 23:50 +0200, Michal Zacek wrote: Hello, we decided to convert NFS4 acl to POSIX (we need share same data between SMB, NFS and GPFS clients), so I created script to convert NFS4 to posix ACL. It is very simple, first I do "chmod -R 770 DIR" and then "setfacl -R .

[gpfsug-discuss] Metadata space usage NFS4 vs POSIX ACL

2019-04-06 Thread Michal Zacek
Hello, we decided to convert NFS4 acl to POSIX (we need share same data between SMB, NFS and GPFS clients), so I created script to convert NFS4 to posix ACL. It is very simple, first I do "chmod -R 770 DIR" and then "setfacl -R . DIR". I was surprised that conversion to posix acl has taken