On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Marion Hakanson wrote: > The answer is, "It depends." If the NetApp volume is NTFS-only > permissions, then chmod from the Unix/NFS side doesn't work, and you can > only manipulate permissions from Windows clients.. If it's a "mixed" > security-style volume, chmod from the Unix/NFS side will delete the NTFS > ACL's, and the SMB clients will see faked-up ACL's that match the new > POSIX permissions. Whichever side made the most recent change will be in > effect.
We evaluated NetApp before selecting ZFS, my general summary of their permissions implementation is "messy, confusing, and inconsistent". Even with these chmod issues, the ZFS implementation is far superior, particularly for sharing the same ACL's between NFSv4 and CIFS. > BTW, our experience has been that NFSv4 on NetApp does not work very > well, and NetApp support folks have advised us to not use it in order to > avoid crashing the filer. They of course blame the various incompatible > NFSv4 client implementations out there.... Indeed; other than a few minor issues here and there, NFSv4 with Solaris servers, and both Linux and Solaris clients has been working great. And I don't really think a "bad client" should be able to crash the server; regardless of the client problems that's a server bug. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
