Hello,
I don't know how many sites out there are using or would like to use ADSM
with AFS file systems, but I suspect we're not the only ones. It would be
nice if AFS support were more complete. For instance, I have observed the
following behavior of ADSM in this respect. Sorry if this is a bit long,
but non-AFS people can stop now. IMBers, please continue.
AFS correctly backs up and restores ACLs on directories: During
incremental backup of a file system in which an ACL on a directory has
changed since the last backup, ADSM backs up the modified directory and,
later, restores the latest ACL correctly.
Aside from the backup and recover of ACLs, ADSM ignores the existence of
AFS, altho it is subject to ACLs during backup and recovery operations:
In order to backup a file, one must be its owner (or root) and also
have the right (ACL) to read in the directory where the file is located.
To recover a file, one must be its owner (or root) and must also have
the right (ACL) to write in the directory (not necessarily the original
one) to which one recovers the file.
On the contrary, one may archive any file one has the right (ACL) to
read. After retrieve, the retrieved file is the property of the user who
archived it.
ADSM ignores distributed file systems in the sense that one can only
recover backed up files on the same station where the file was backed up.
Of course, one can use the 'dsmc set access' command to permit a user on
another station to recover it, but then one must think carefully about
whether one wants to use the default UNIX (owner) rights or do 'set
access' based on AFS ACLs.
I would like to see improvements in AFS support, especially taking ACLs
into account and not just UNIX file ownership. After all, even AIX sans
AFS has ACLs.
John
--------------------------------------------------------------
John O'Neall e-mail: jon AT cc.in2p3 DOT fr
John O'Neall e-mail: jon AT cc.in2p3 DOT fr
Centre de Calcul de l'IN2P3 phone: (33) 78 93 08 80
Villeurbanne, France fax: (33) 78 94 30 54
|
