Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> George Wilson wrote:
>>> New code should either update the SPA_VERSION whenever you change the
>>> on-disk format and/or the new ZPL_VERSION whenever you change the
>>> Posix layer.
>>
>> That is what I thought but as you say it is currently a lit
George Wilson wrote:
> New code should either update the SPA_VERSION whenever you change the
> on-disk format and/or the new ZPL_VERSION whenever you change the Posix
> layer.
That is what I thought but as you say it is currently a little confusing.
Given that I believe that for ZFS Crypto I sh
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> George Wilson wrote:
>> New code should either update the SPA_VERSION whenever you change the
>> on-disk format and/or the new ZPL_VERSION whenever you change the Posix
>> layer.
>
> That is what I thought but as you say it is currently a little confusing.
>
> Given tha
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> I'm looking for some guidance on when it is appropriate to increase the
> SPA and ZFS version numbers.
>
> Currently for ZFS Crypto I've only increased the SPA version number and
> I'm using spa_version() in a few places - probably a few more are needed
> though.
>
>
I'm looking for some guidance on when it is appropriate to increase the
SPA and ZFS version numbers.
Currently for ZFS Crypto I've only increased the SPA version number and
I'm using spa_version() in a few places - probably a few more are needed
though.
What are the guidelines for when the SPA
