>From a practical standpoint, 2009/387 would also require a new system attribute. It would be ideal if we could add both the offline and reparse system attributes at the same time, which would be timely for this case.
Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan.M.Wright" <a...@sun.com> To: <Richard.Matthews at Sun.COM> Cc: <PSARC-ext at sun.com>; "Jiri Sasek - RPE Prague" <Jiri.Sasek at Sun.COM>; "Daniel Hain" <dhain at sac.sfbay.sun.com> Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 6:52 PM Subject: Re: Support off-line files on SAM-QFS for Samba in Solaris[PSARC/2009/381 FastTrack timeout 07/13/2009] > Having a TCR against Samba in order to allow this (or any) fasttrack > to be approved on the basis that the fasttrack is not the right solution > but resolves a customer problem seems a bit strange to me. > > If we agree that adding a system attribute is the appropriate solution, we > should pursue that now. The fact that SAMFS would require a change > to support system attributes shouldn't really have a bearing on selecting > the appropriate architectural solution, and if that's a concern perhaps we > can talk about that offline. > > Alan > -- > > Rick Matthews wrote: >> Darren, >> >> I agree with Alan's proposal that the existing system extended >> attributes be expanded >> to include "offline" or whatever the appropriate tag could be. This >> would require a change >> to SAM-QFS to support Solaris extended attributes in at least the case >> of that flag (a SAM-QFS >> project/case, I'd guess) and modifying the interfaces introduced in >> PSARC/2007/315 to include >> the newly defined flag. >> This case appears to be asking to use existing interfaces of SAM-QFS >> to cause the >> Solaris provided samba to detect a condition that is causing the >> described customer >> problem, and mitigate it. The resultant FILE_ATTRIBUTE_OFFLINE within the >> SMB_QUERY_FILE_BASIC_INFO appears to be standard (at least in the SNIA >> document). >> I would think that advise to the PAC about modifying SAM-QFS to at >> least support >> an system extended attribute for offline, and for some unknown group >> to add that to >> the existing system extended attributes would be an appropriate response. >> In the mean time, I would think this case could be approved with a >> TCR to modify >> the version of Samba shipped by Sun when the architecturally >> appropriate interfaces >> (those using the existing infrastructure described in PSARC/2007/315) >> exist in Sun >> current and future HSM products. >> I could help add this to the general opinion, or add it as a minority >> opinion. >> == >> Rick >> >> On 07/ 9/09 04:33 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote: >>> Alan.M.Wright wrote: >>>> Providing this as a temporary solution to relieve a customer problem >>>> is excellent. My disagreement is that it should be committed as a >>>> long term solution for offline support when we already have a defined >>>> system attribute mechanism that could be used to solve the problem >>>> via libc. >>> >>> Given the above I'm derailing this case for the purpose of writing an >>> opinion with Advice to fund the above mentioned project and to point >>> out the issue of adding Solaris/Sun functionality to Samba with no >>> planned match for the in kernel CIFS server. >>> >>> PSARC members please are you willing to vote based on the above our >>> would you like to see draft opinion text first. I've marked the >>> case as "waiting need vote" for now. >>> >>> Note that this is *derail* not *deny* (though depending on the vote >>> it could be but I doubt it). >> > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc at opensolaris.org >
