Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Dave Miner wrote: > >> Putting into the zpool command would feel odd to me, but I agree that >> there may be a useful utility here. >> > > There is value to putting this functionality in zpool for the same > reason that it was useful to put 'iostat' and other "duplicate" > functionality in zpool. For example, zpool can skip disks which are > already currently in use, or it can recommend whole disks (rather than > partitions) if none of the logical disk partitions are currently in > use. >
Nit: zpool iostat provides a different point of view on I/O than iostat. iostat cannot do what zpool iostat does, so it is not really a case of duplicate functionality. VxVM has a similar tool, vxstat. Today, zpool uses libdiskmgt to determine if the devices are in use or have existing file systems. If found, it will fail, unless the -f (force) flag is used. I have done some work on making intelligent decisions about using devices. It is a non-trivial task for the general case. Consider that a X4500 has 281,474,976,710,655 possible permutations for RAID-0 using only a single slice per disk, it quickly becomes an exercise of compromise. At present, I'm adding this to RAIDoptmizer, but there I have the knowledge of the physical layout of the system(s), which is difficult to ascertain (guess) for the generic hardware case. It may be that in the long term we could add some sort of smarts to zpool, but I'm not (currently) optimistic. > The zfs commands are currently at least an order of magnitude easier > to comprehend and use than the legacy commands related to storage > devices. It would be nice if the zfs commands will continue to > simplify what is now quite obtuse. > No doubt. -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
