Garrett D'Amore wrote: > This sounds reasonable, and is not like the case of AFS which uses > special tokens in symbolic links that can expand to other things.
That's our model, yes. > I'm a bit concerned about potential effects on applications, it *seems* > like this is done in a manner that is safe, but there are a few items: > > * are applications consistent in their use of pathconf/fpathconf to > get filesystem limits Not sure. > * presumably archivers and such are not expected to traverse these? > (they get handled like an ordinary symbolic link) Correct - we only want the symlink bytes. The main issue is the potential size, we think. > * what happens when the referral is archived and then reextracted? > (is the attribute lost?) The attribute is not sent in the archive stream, but will be re-applied by generic code when the symlink is recreated. We envision code to look at the contents in fop_symlink() to set the bit on create, whether the create was via NFS or ZFS. Rob T
