gpfs 3.5 and Samba Compatibility

Nimrod Sapir NIMRODS at
Sun Jun 3 02:00:53 MDT 2012

You are right, of course. Also, I can't really think of a possible 
solution from the GPFS side that will solve the problem while keeping 
backward-compatibility. Is gpfs 3.5 compatibility included in the Samba 
roadmap? for which version? Is there anyone in the community (beside our 
team) which already started to examine this configuration? 


Christof Schmitt <christof.schmitt at> wrote on 01/06/2012 

> From a brief look, making this change would tie Samba to GPFS
> 3.5. A proper solution should allow a binary of the vfs_gpfs
> module to work with GPFS 3.5 and older versions.
> I am not sure if this can be done automatically, there is always
> the fallback of adding a config option to specify the format.
> When reading an ACL, simply allocating enough space and then
> deciding according to the gpfs_acl header could be
> enough. Writing might be more complicated as the Samba module
> would not know beforehand which format to try.
> Regards,
> Christof Schmitt || IBM || SONAS System Development || Tucson, AZ
> christof.schmitt at  ||  +1-520-799-2469  (T/L: 321-2469)

More information about the samba-technical mailing list