[PATCH v2] File Server Remote VSS Protocol server
ddiss at suse.de
Tue Mar 24 07:19:59 MDT 2015
Thanks for the feedback Volker.
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 13:37:11 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 08:37:37PM +0100, David Disseldorp wrote:
> > This patch-set adds a new File Server Remote VSS (Volume Shadow Copy
> > Service) Protocol server, test infrastructure, documentation, and
> > corresponding VFS layer changes to handle remote share snapshot
> > requests.
> As discussed privately already: This patchset adds a persistent tdb
> for fss_state using tdb_pack/unpack. tdb_pack/unpack is really a bad
> interface that I'd like to get rid of eventually. In new code we do
> marshalling of structures with idl/ndr usually. Can you change the code
> to idl before it goes in? This way necessary upgrade code can be avoided?
I agree that tdb_pack/unpack is a pretty ugly interface, and I'm fine
with using idl for [un]marshalling. As mentioned though, I don't think
this should be a show-stopper for merging this feature - conversion to
IDL should be possible without a change to the on-disk format.
If you disagree, then I'll go ahead and make these changes for the next
round, but it'll take a little while to fully test this.
> Also, looking a bit closer at fss_state_store: There's a dbwrap_wipe
> without a transaction. Isn't that racy? Do we have an overview somewhere
> about the data model stored in fss_state?
The database is only manipulated by the single FSRVP server process, so
this shouldn't be an issue. I haven't written an overview of the
fss_state data model, but I'd suggest looking at the local.fss_state
smbtorture test suite for interface details. Otherwise there's the
More information about the samba-technical