On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:17 AM Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]> wrote: > Add new options to "zpool create", "zpool upgrade", and "zpool set": > - zpool create -o features=portable-20XX (yearly values) > - zpool create -o features=portable > - zpool upgrade -o features=portable-20XX > - zpool upgrade -o features=portable > - zpool set feature@portable=20XX > - zpool set feature@portable=enabled > > "-o features=portable-2016" means features that were supported by all tier-1 > platforms at the beginning of 2016. This definition will not change over > time. Specifically, on January 1, 2016, the following all supported the > features: > - a numbered release of FreeBSD (specifically FreeBSD 10.2 for portable-2016) > - a numbered release of ZFSonLinux (specifically ZoL 0.6.5.3 for > portable-2016) > - the code in illumos-gate as of 1 year prior (specifically Jan 1 2015 for > portable-2016). > > Similar yearly portable values will be created at the beginning of each year.
This seems like a good balance between evolving over time, and being simple enough for users to reason about in practice. It's one train that just rolls forward with the passage of time, which I think is always a pretty easy concept to understand relatively quickly -- without needing to fold in the complexity of the changing landscape of all of the different operating systems and release versions that come and go around us. > For now, I would be most comfortable with the default behavior of "zpool > create" remaining the same. If we find something that we think works well > then I'd consider making "zpool create" imply "-o features=portable" by > default, and "zpool upgrade <pool>|-a" imply "-o features=portable" by > default. Leaving the default posture as-is (even if only for now) seems fine to me too. On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 10:49, Jason King via openzfs-developer <[email protected]> wrote: > Are there any concerns this might become a bit unwieldy over time? I’m > undecided on this myself, but thought it’d be worth raising the question. > > Just as a data point, had this existed when ZFS was first publicly released > (Nov 2005 is the date I can find), that would mean 13 ‘portable-XXX’ values, > plus ‘portable’ (though a number of values might be equivalent) today. I don't think that's too big a deal -- once they're defined, they presumably won't keep changing. It'll be like the ever-increasing list of DTrace versions, etc. Cheers. -- Joshua M. Clulow Engineer @ Joyent http://blog.sysmgr.org ------------------------------------------ openzfs: openzfs-developer Permalink: https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/T562a2f6ecf883736-Me43381e9200bc9b62b95619b Delivery options: https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/subscription
