about the worm feature

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
Hi, all

I'd like to use vfs_worm modules to make a backup share for our storage system.
Except the grace period, I think it is better to add a retention period.
A retention period means that during this period files are protected and immutable,
but over the period the files can be modified or deleted.

How about add this idea to add the options?
Or should I create a new vfs module to implement this?


Regards,
Li Dan




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
I think your should create a new module for this. Even if would be
based on or share a large amount of code
with vfs_worm.

The reason I think so is because 'worm' has a common meaning for
storage and it would be
confusing with a 'worm' module that does similar to but not quite 'worm'.



On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Li, Dan via samba-technical
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi, all
>
> I'd like to use vfs_worm modules to make a backup share for our storage system.
> Except the grace period, I think it is better to add a retention period.
> A retention period means that during this period files are protected and immutable,
> but over the period the files can be modified or deleted.
>
> How about add this idea to add the options?
> Or should I create a new vfs module to implement this?
>
>
> Regards,
> Li Dan
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
Hi,

Thanks for your suggestion!

I can add a new module named "worml" for short of "worm limit" which has the retention period.
I'd like to implement it based on the code of vfs_worm and vfs_readonly.

I know that 'worm' has a common meaning in storage for ages,
but I think the meaning is changing because the evolution of the media of storage.
For example, Glusterfs and NetApp has its worm feature with the retention period.

http://blog.gluster.org/2016/07/worm-write-once-read-multiple-retention-and-compliance-2/
http://www.netapp.com/us/products/backup-recovery/snaplock-compliance.aspx

Anyway, can I just contribute my patch and how should I do that?

Regards,
Li Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ronnie sahlberg [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 11:48 AM
> To: Li, Dan/李 丹 <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: about the worm feature
>
> I think your should create a new module for this. Even if would be based
> on or share a large amount of code with vfs_worm.
>
> The reason I think so is because 'worm' has a common meaning for storage
> and it would be confusing with a 'worm' module that does similar to but
> not quite 'worm'.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Li, Dan via samba-technical
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi, all
> >
> > I'd like to use vfs_worm modules to make a backup share for our storage
> system.
> > Except the grace period, I think it is better to add a retention period.
> > A retention period means that during this period files are protected
> > and immutable, but over the period the files can be modified or deleted.
> >
> > How about add this idea to add the options?
> > Or should I create a new vfs module to implement this?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Li Dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
Hi

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 05:19:52AM +0000, Li, Dan via samba-technical wrote:
> Thanks for your suggestion!

fwiw, I agree with Ronnie, this should go into a new module.

> I can add a new module named "worml" for short of "worm limit" which has the retention period.
> I'd like to implement it based on the code of vfs_worm and vfs_readonly.

worml sounds awkward, why not just vfs_retention?

> I know that 'worm' has a common meaning in storage for ages,
> but I think the meaning is changing because the evolution of the media of storage.
> For example, Glusterfs and NetApp has its worm feature with the retention period.
>
> http://blog.gluster.org/2016/07/worm-write-once-read-multiple-retention-and-compliance-2/
> http://www.netapp.com/us/products/backup-recovery/snaplock-compliance.aspx
>
> Anyway, can I just contribute my patch and how should I do that?

<https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Contribute>

The initial section "How to contribute to Samba?" covers the most important
things, namely copyright policy, signed-off-by tags and git format patches. :)

-slow

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
Hi,

I create a pull-request for this feature a few days ago,
could anybody review this patch for me?

https://github.com/samba-team/samba/pull/98
Thanks very much!

----------------------------------------
以上、よろしくお願いします
李 丹(LI DAN)
Dept. III of Technology and DevelopmentNanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) No. 6 Wenzhu Road, Nanjing, 210012, China
T: +86-25-86630566-9488
Mail: [hidden email]
----------------------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Böhme [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 4:10 PM
> To: Li, Dan/李 丹 <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: about the worm feature
>
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 05:19:52AM +0000, Li, Dan via samba-technical wrote:
> > Thanks for your suggestion!
>
> fwiw, I agree with Ronnie, this should go into a new module.
>
> > I can add a new module named "worml" for short of "worm limit" which has
> the retention period.
> > I'd like to implement it based on the code of vfs_worm and vfs_readonly.
>
> worml sounds awkward, why not just vfs_retention?
>
> > I know that 'worm' has a common meaning in storage for ages, but I
> > think the meaning is changing because the evolution of the media of
> storage.
> > For example, Glusterfs and NetApp has its worm feature with the retention
> period.
> >
> >
> http://blog.gluster.org/2016/07/worm-write-once-read-multiple-retentio
> > n-and-compliance-2/
> >
> http://www.netapp.com/us/products/backup-recovery/snaplock-compliance.
> > aspx
> >
> > Anyway, can I just contribute my patch and how should I do that?
>
> <https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Contribute>
>
> The initial section "How to contribute to Samba?" covers the most important
> things, namely copyright policy, signed-off-by tags and git format
> patches. :)
>
> -slow
>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: about the worm feature

Samba - samba-technical mailing list
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 09:59:57AM +0000, Li, Dan via samba-technical wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I create a pull-request for this feature a few days ago,
> could anybody review this patch for me?
>
> https://github.com/samba-team/samba/pull/98
> Thanks very much!
>
> ----------------------------------------
> 以上、よろしくお願いします
> 李 丹(LI DAN)
> Dept. III of Technology and DevelopmentNanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST) No. 6 Wenzhu Road, Nanjing, 210012, China
> T: +86-25-86630566-9488
> Mail: [hidden email]
> ----------------------------------------

Hi Dan,

Can you send the patch directly to the [hidden email]
mailing list ? Like the Linux kernel, Samba works off our mailing
lists for patch review, not a proprietary platform like github.

Thanks !

Jeremy.