[Bugs] [Bug 1369349] enable trash, then truncate a large file lead to glusterfsd segfault

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1369349



--- Comment #9 from Jiffin <jthottan at redhat.com> ---
(In reply to WuVT from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jiffin from comment #7)
> > Sorry I didn't get this. Incase of truncate we need to copy the old
> > (original file) to trash directory before performing the truncate. so I
> > don't understand how rename will helpful here?
> >  
> > The change which I am talking as work around will only effect truncated
> > files. For the deleted files it will work based on the limit which have
> > set(trash-max-file-size).
> 
> Sorry for my poor English.
> I misunderstood the meaning of trash truncate. I need to learn the function
> of vfs->fops.
> Another question, I tried to comment out truncate and ftruncate of
> trash-fops, like this:
> struct xlator_fops fops = {
>         .unlink          = trash_unlink,
>         // .truncate        = trash_truncate,
>         // .ftruncate       = trash_ftruncate,
>         .rmdir           = trash_rmdir,
>         .mkdir           = trash_mkdir,
>         .rename          = trash_rename,
> };
> Is there any bad effects by doing this?

It will disable for trash feature for truncate operations. If are u not worried
about truncated files, then it is perfectly okay to do it.

> I tested the recycle of samba-4.2.3, it seems like that the recycle dosn't
> deal with truncated files.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iatLcp6ZqK&a=cc_unsubscribe