Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Goffredo Baroncelli:
> On 2012-10-28 00:38, Hugo Mills wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:30:44AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> >> Am Samstag, 27. Oktober 2012 schrieb Michael Kjörling:
> >>> On 27 Oct 2012 18:43 +0200, from mar...@lichtvoll.de (Martin 
> >> 
> >> Steigerwald):
> >>>> Possibly this could be done tabular as well, like:
> >>>            Data: RAID 0   System: RAID 1   Unused
> >>>
> >>> /dev/vdb     307.25 MB                -        2.23 GB
> >>> /dev/vdc     307.25 MB             8 MB        2.69 GB
> >>> /dev/vdd     307.25 MB             8 MB        2.24 GB
> >>>
> >>>            ============   ==============   ============
> >>>
> >>> TOTAL        921.75 MB            16 MB        7.16 GB
> >> 
> >> Hmmm, good idea. I like it this way around.
> >> 
> >> It would scale better with the number of drives and there is a good
> >> way to  place the totals.
> >> 
> >> I wonder about how to possibly include the used part of each tree.
> >> With  mostly 5 columns it might be doable.
> >
> > 
> >    Note that this could get arbitrarily wide in the presence of the
> >
> > (planned) per-object replication config. Otherwise, it works. The
> > width is probably likely to grow more slowly than the length, though,
> > so this way round is probably the better option. IMO. Eggshell blue
> > is good enough. :)
> 
> I liked the Martin idea too. However I think that it is not applicable.
> Even on my simple test bed I got
> 
>         Data,Single:              8.00MB
>         Data,RAID0:             307.25MB
>         Metadata,Single:          8.00MB
>         Metadata,RAID1:         460.94MB
>         System,Single:            4.00MB
>         System,RAID1:             8.00MB
> 
> Plus we can have also  Data+Metadata...

One could still use multi row approach in that case:

           Data: RAID 0   System: RAID 1   Unused
/dev/vdb     307.25 MB                -        2.23 GB
                  Data: RAID 1  System: RAID 0   
                        250.12 MB              128 MB
           Data: RAID 0   System: RAID 1   Unused
/dev/vdc     307.25 MB             8 MB        2.69 GB
                  Data: RAID 1  System: RAID 0   
                        250.12 MB                          -
[…]

But still if if can be arbitrarily long due to that per object replication 
config, a vertical output might and leaving graphical representation to a 
Qt Quick application or so might be better.

-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to