On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Also, going down the rabbit hole, how would this behavior change if I >> used cephfs to set the default layout on some directory to use a >> different pool? > > I'm not sure what you're asking here — if you have access to the > metadata server, you can change the pool that new files go into, and I > think you can set the pool to be whatever you like (and we should > probably harden all this, too). So you can fix it if it's a problem, > but you can also turn it into a problem. I am aware that I would be able to do this. My question was more along the lines of: if the pool that data is written to can be set on a per-file or per-directory basis, and we can also set read and write permissions per pool, how would the filesystem behave properly? Hide files the mounting user doesn't have read access to? Return -EIO or -EPERM on writes to files stored in pools we can't write to? Failing a mount if we're missing some permission on any file or directory in the fs? All of these sound painful in one way or another, so I'm having trouble envisioning what the "correct" behavior would look like. Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
