I agree, halfway there but stable is reasonable to integrate. Are there actual plans to improve this for removing all other vdev types, or is this just an "eventually we would like to do this" sort of thing?
Does this currently only work with pools that do not contain any raidz/mirror vdevs, or is the constraint solely that you can only remove a "simple" vdev? - Rich On Mar 2, 2016 12:42 PM, "Turbo Fredriksson" <tu...@bayour.com> wrote: > On Mar 2, 2016, at 5:39 PM, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:31:28 -0800, Matthew Ahrens wrote: > > ... > >> We'd also appreciate opinions of "Please upstream even without > >> mirror/RAID-Z support" > > > > I am for this. Simply because it lets one undo an accidental zpool add > > (instead of a zpool attach). > > > I agree. Half the functionality is way better than > none of the functionality... > -- > I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they > make as they go by. > Douglas Adams > ------------------------------------------- openzfs-developer Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/274414/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/274414/28015062-cce53afa Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=28015062&id_secret=28015062-f966d51c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
