Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:51:24 -0400 (EDT) | From | Peter Jones <> | Subject | Re: (reiserfs) Re: NFSv4 ACLs (was: ...ACL's and reiser...) |
| |
On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, Xuan Baldauf wrote:
> There might be a misconception, I surely was not clear enough. Imagine > a filesystem where every filesystem object (file, directory) has it's > fully resolved ACL stored in (a) it's directory entry or (b) it's stat > data. (This also needs to be discussed.) This way, you can quickly > know wether to allow or deny an access, you do not need to check ACLs > of all parents. I think this is the way you (Ted) imagine ACLs. > > The only real drawback of this implementation would be that ACL > setting is slow. (But checking is (much) more important than setting.) > But there might be an easy way to overcome the problem: when you run
putting the ACL in the directory entry is an administrative nightmare; you have >1 ACL for files with >1 i_nlink
-- Peter
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." -- Einstein
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |