Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Re: [PATCH] PAG support, try #2

[chas williams]

In message <[e-mail]>,David Howells writes:
>Where's this 1:1 come from? PAGs aren't 1:1 with processes, nor are they 1:1
>with users.
>
>I've tried to implement them as I understand the design information I could
>find (which specified that any process could belong to a single PAG). From the
>comments that have been made, it seems that each user needs some sort of
>fallback token set for any process that doesn't have a PAG.

PAGs shouldnt be 1:1 with processes or users.  They are closer in nature
to process groups.  However,  a process wouldnt loose its PAG affiliation
after calling setsid.  This is the main reason using the process group
isn't sufficient for PAGs.