Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On Sep 14, 2011, at 12:22 , Ian Collins wrote: On 09/14/11 08:49 PM, Sami Ketola wrote: On Sep 13, 2011, at 3:21 , Peter Tribble wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Paul B. Hensonhen...@acm.org wrote: I recently saw a message posted to the sunmanagers list complaining about installing a kernel patch and suddenly having his ACL's disappear completely whenever a chmod occurred. I replied and asked him to check if the aclmode attribute was gone, as it sounded like the default discard that was (questionably) implemented in OpenSolaris/Solaris 11. He confirmed it was, so it looks like the removal of aclmode was backported to Solaris 10? I don't know exactly what kernel patch he installed; it doesn't look like update 10 is out yet. Update 10 has been out for about 3 weeks. No it has not. As of now Solaris 10 u10 has not been released. It slipped out the back door for a couple of days a few weeks ago. And it is out again now. Oracle Solaris 10 8/11 s10s_u10wos_17b SPARC Copyright (c) 1983, 2011, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Assembled 23 August 2011 Sami___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On 09/14/11 08:49 PM, Sami Ketola wrote: On Sep 13, 2011, at 3:21 , Peter Tribble wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Paul B. Hensonhen...@acm.org wrote: I recently saw a message posted to the sunmanagers list complaining about installing a kernel patch and suddenly having his ACL's disappear completely whenever a chmod occurred. I replied and asked him to check if the aclmode attribute was gone, as it sounded like the default discard that was (questionably) implemented in OpenSolaris/Solaris 11. He confirmed it was, so it looks like the removal of aclmode was backported to Solaris 10? I don't know exactly what kernel patch he installed; it doesn't look like update 10 is out yet. Update 10 has been out for about 3 weeks. No it has not. As of now Solaris 10 u10 has not been released. It slipped out the back door for a couple of days a few weeks ago. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Paul B. Henson hen...@acm.org wrote: I recently saw a message posted to the sunmanagers list complaining about installing a kernel patch and suddenly having his ACL's disappear completely whenever a chmod occurred. I replied and asked him to check if the aclmode attribute was gone, as it sounded like the default discard that was (questionably) implemented in OpenSolaris/Solaris 11. He confirmed it was, so it looks like the removal of aclmode was backported to Solaris 10? I don't know exactly what kernel patch he installed; it doesn't look like update 10 is out yet. Update 10 has been out for about 3 weeks. Can somebody in the know confirm whether or not aclmode is gone in update 10? I didn't think they'd backport such a feature disabling change to Solaris 10, seems to not line up with the long term stability and compatibility that's supposed to be the benefit there... I just tried on a U9 and U10 box. On the U10 system, I did a simple 'chmod g+s' on a directory with an ACL, and wham, the ACL vanished. Same operation on U9, and the ACL is preserved. (This doesn't affect me all that much, as ACLs on ZFS have never really worked right, so anything where the ACL is critical gets stored on ufs [yuck].) Also, aclmode is no longer listed in the usage message you see if you do 'zfs get'. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On 9/13/2011 5:07 AM, Paul Kraus wrote: Patch-ID# 144500-19 is the kernel update that is the kernel from 10U10 Yep, the guy posting on sunmanagers confirmed that was the patch he installed which broke aclmode. Did update 10 sneak out under cover of darkness or what? I didn't see any announcements or chatter about it, google doesn't find anything, and the Oracle download site still only shows update 9: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/overview/solaris-latest-version-170418.html Thank you for flagging this, as Oracle support is telling me I have to update to this release to get zpool 26 which fixes a zfs bug we are running into, but if it breaks the ACL inheritance we have been using, then it is non-starter. Yup. Fortunately, there are no critical bugs (that Oracle is willing to fix 8-/) that I've been waiting for. I thought I'd be able to keep an up-to-date S10 install going while I figure out what to do next; guess not :(. He already opened a support ticket, they responded: - ZFS appears to be the only file system supporting NFSv4 ACLs that attempts to preserve ACLs during chmod(2) operations. Unfortunately, this requires the ACL to be modified in ways that are confusing to customers and the time has come to stop the confusion and to just discard the ACL during chmod(2) operations. This implies that the ZFS aclmode property will no longer be needed and will be removed from ZFS. This functionality is targetted to be back in Solaris 11 - as per CR7002239 want ZFS aclmode property back - Interesting that there's already a new CR to put it back -- I thought that bridge was already burned. It's already back in Illumos. I wonder how long it will take to get put back in S10; or I guess it could be one of those CR's that never gets resolved. I suppose I'll open my own ticket to voice support. runs the system out of RAM. The snapshot is a partial zfs recv. I am told this is a known bug (destruction of large snapshots can run the system out of RAM as the destroy operation commits as one TXG). There is a fix, but it in the on-disk format, so just zpool upgrading to version 26 will not fix existing snapshots. We only have 32 GB in this system and the faulty snapshot *should* be about 2.5 TB. Hmm, if updating the zpool won't fix the existing snapshot, how is support telling you to recover? Is it going to be one of those wipe and rebuild resolutions 8-/? Good luck... I imagine a pool upgraded to version 26 will no longer be compatible with other zfs implementations. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On 9/13/2011 5:21 AM, Peter Tribble wrote: Update 10 has been out for about 3 weeks. Where was any announcement posted? I haven't heard anything about it. As far as I can tell, the Oracle site still only has update 9 available for download: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html I just tried on a U9 and U10 box. On the U10 system, I did a simple 'chmod g+s' on a directory with an ACL, and wham, the ACL vanished. Same operation on U9, and the ACL is preserved. Meh, bogus :(. Thanks for the confirmation. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Paul B. Henson hen...@acm.org wrote: On 9/13/2011 5:21 AM, Peter Tribble wrote: Update 10 has been out for about 3 weeks. Where was any announcement posted? I haven't heard anything about it. As far as I can tell, the Oracle site still only has update 9 available for download: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html Hm. They updated that a few weeks ago with a new release but you're right, it's now back to S10U9. Which leaves me with a whole slew of boxes running a release that doesn't exist. Oracle Solaris 10 8/11 s10x_u10wos_17a X86 Copyright (c) 1983, 2011, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Assembled 13 July 2011 -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On 9/13/2011 12:46 PM, Peter Tribble wrote: Hm. They updated that a few weeks ago with a new release but you're right, it's now back to S10U9. Which leaves me with a whole slew of boxes running a release that doesn't exist. Oracle Solaris 10 8/11 s10x_u10wos_17a X86 Copyright (c) 1983, 2011, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Assembled 13 July 2011 Interesting. For some reason it just doesn't surprise me 8-/. Maybe it got recalled because it broke aclmode ;). On a different but related note, I went to try and open a support ticket about update 10, and for the life of me I couldn't figure out how to tell it the product in question was Solaris. I'm not sure if something has changed since the last time I opened a bug (many months ago), but today the support site went beyond its usual painful all the way to unusable sigh. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Paul B. Henson hen...@acm.org wrote:
Did update 10 sneak out under cover of darkness or what? I didn't see
any announcements or chatter about it, google doesn't find anything, and
the Oracle download site still only shows update 9:
It was supposed to be released on August 17, but I have not had
support point me at it yet. I suspect (based on some chatter) that
they found a bug that has forced them back to the drawing board for a
few weeks.
Thank you for flagging this, as Oracle support is telling me I have
to update to this release to get zpool 26 which fixes a zfs bug we
are running into, but if it breaks the ACL inheritance we have been
using, then it is non-starter.
Yup. Fortunately, there are no critical bugs (that Oracle is willing to
fix 8-/) that I've been waiting for. I thought I'd be able to keep an
up-to-date S10 install going while I figure out what to do next; guess
not :(.
Uhhh, not being able to destroy snapshots that are too big is a
pretty big one for us :-(
He already opened a support ticket, they responded:
-
ZFS appears to be the only file system supporting NFSv4 ACLs
that attempts to preserve ACLs during chmod(2) operations.
Unfortunately, this requires the ACL to be modified in ways that are
confusing to customers and the time has come to stop the confusion and to
just discard the ACL during chmod(2) operations. This implies that the ZFS
aclmode property will no longer be needed and will be removed from ZFS.
So the default behavior will be aclmode = discard, wonderful as
that will probably seriously break what I am working on right now.
This functionality is targetted to be back in Solaris 11 - as per
CR7002239 want ZFS aclmode property back
-
runs the system out of RAM. The snapshot is a partial zfs recv. I am
told this is a known bug (destruction of large snapshots can run the
system out of RAM as the destroy operation commits as one TXG). There
is a fix, but it in the on-disk format, so just zpool upgrading to
version 26 will not fix existing snapshots. We only have 32 GB in
this system and the faulty snapshot *should* be about 2.5 TB.
Hmm, if updating the zpool won't fix the existing snapshot, how is support
telling you to recover? Is it going to be one of those wipe and rebuild
resolutions 8-/? Good luck...
I am having that discussion with Oracle Support right now :-) One
option is to load the system with enough RAM to destroy the legacy
snapshots and then not let them grow too big (in other words, take
more frequent snapshots). But I have been having trouble getting
support to tell me how to estimate the amount of RAM necessary to
delete a snapshot based on *something* I can measure.
P.S. The backup server ran into the bug full steam ahead and is off
line right now. On production, once I realized the root cause I
stopped the snapshot destroy script, so they are just piling up now
:-) Production is 20 TB and 400 million objects, we can't reload that,
the outage would kill us.
--
{1-2-3-4-5-6-7-}
Paul Kraus
- Senior Systems Architect, Garnet River ( http://www.garnetriver.com/ )
- Sound Designer: Frankenstein, A New Musical
(http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=123170297765140)
- Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company (
http://www.sloctheater.org/ )
- Technical Advisor, RPI Players
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:41:36PM -0700, Ian Collins wrote: Not work on what way? I have a client who makes extensive (more like excessive!) use of ACLs on ZFS and we don't see any problems. Other than the ridiculous complexity of some of the ACLs that have grown over time. From my perspective, the fact that any random process can come along and do a legacy chmod() and destroy your acl falls pretty clearly into the not work camp sigh... That and the fact that an NFSv4 exclusive open destroys an inherited ACL :(. If you can somehow keep things from trying to poke legacy mode bits and don't use NFS, maybe you're ok. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] aclmode gone in S10u10?
[...] He already opened a support ticket, they responded: - ZFS appears to be the only file system supporting NFSv4 ACLs that attempts to preserve ACLs during chmod(2) operations. Unfortunately, this requires the ACL to be modified in ways that are confusing to customers and the time has come to stop the confusion and to just discard the ACL during chmod(2) operations. This implies that the ZFS aclmode property will no longer be needed and will be removed from ZFS. This functionality is targetted to be back in Solaris 11 - as per CR7002239 want ZFS aclmode property back - [...] Just so you know and can respond to Oracles wrong statements with facts: ZFS is not the only filesystem doing something like that. NetApps WAFL provides an option to make it behave very similar. Regards Florian Wagner signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
