On Thu, 1 Aug 2019, Jan Fajerski wrote: > Hi list, > while discussing the snap-schedule module, a feature request for protecting > snapshots against deletion came up. This is partly tied to the scheduled > pruning, when a user wants to protect an individual snapshot from being pruned. > It could however also be used to protect individual snapshots from being > accidentally deleted. This sounds useful! > One proposed interface (thx Lars) would be to implement a new extended attribute > on snapshot directories. I like this as an interface as its quiet flexible and > could be build upon (by say a mgr module command). > > Does snapshot deletion involve the MDS? Otherwise older clients not aware might > still delete them (like quotas depend on client cooperation) The snapshot removal is a distinct request to the MDS, normally (only?) triggered by an rmdir on the virtual snapshot directory. There shouldn't be any problem with teh MDS doing any checks (and returning EPERM or whatever as needed). > Is a virtual xattr on a virtual directory a bad idea? Seems fine to me. It is a bit awkward from the command line, though. What about 'chattr +e' (or 'chattr -e'), which normally sets the immutable flag for local file systems? sage > Other concerns or better ideas? > > Best, > Jan > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx > > _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
