Would you accept a patch that introduces two new fs commands:
fs getprecache
fs setprecache
and that "hides" the precache command? IOW, precache will work, but it will
not show up in fs help output. This introduces a new pair of get/set
commands, and would give admins the ability to query the value, and
therefore manage it.
Alternately, fs precache can be modified to display the value when no
arguments are provided, instead of generate a syntax error like it does
right now.
There's a lack of consistency in the fs commands, but my personal preference
is for get/set commands when we add new features, as opposed to a single
command for both setting and querying something.
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Derrick Brashear <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Phillip Moore
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Another fs command I can't find any documentation for: fs precache
> > In this case, it appears that there's no way to query the value. This
> > seems like bad interface design to me. If there's a mechanism for
> setting
> > an important value that changes the behavior of the client, there has to
> be
> > a mechanism for querying that value. Otherwise, you can't manage it.
> > Write-only, read-never parameters are very bad.
> > Looking at the code in src/venus/fs.c, it looks to me like this *should*
> > have been implemented as a pair of CLI commands: setprecache and
> > getprecache, and in fact, that should be straight forward, and fully
> > backwards compatible.
>
> Probably. And I take blame for that.
>
> > Is this another bleeding edge feature that the authors thought wasn't
> > important enough to write a man page for?
>
> No.
>
>
>
> --
> Derrick
>
