On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Kaushal M <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Kelvin Edmison > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Gaurav, > > > > I think that it is appropriate to keep the commit force options for > > replace-brick, just to prevent less experienced admins from > self-inflicted > > data loss scenarios. > > > > The add-brick/remove-brick pair of operations is not an intuitive choice > for > > admins who are trying to solve a problem with a specific brick. In this > > situation, admins are generally thinking 'how can I move the data from > this > > brick to another one', and an admin that is casually surfing > documentation > > might infer that the replace-brick operation is the correct one, rather > than > > a sequence of commands that are somehow magically related. > > > > I believe that keeping the mandatory commit force options for > replace-brick > > will help give these admins reason to pause and re-consider if this is > the > > right command for them to do, and prevent cases where new gluster admins > > start shouting 'gluster lost my data'. > > > > Regards, > > Kelvin > > > > > > > > On 04/02/2015 07:26 AM, Gaurav Garg wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Since GlusterFs version 3.6.0 "gluster volume replace-brick <VOLNAME> > >> <SOURCE-BRICK> <NEW-BRICK> {start [force]|pause|abort|status|commit }" > >> command have deprecated. Only "gluster volume replace-brick <VOLNAME> > >> <SOURCE-BRICK> <NEW-BRICK> commit force" command supported. > >> > >> for bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094119 , Patch > >> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/10101/ is removing cli/glusterd code > for > >> "gluster volume replace-brick <VOLNAME> <BRICK> <NEW-BRICK> {start > >> [force]|pause|abort|status|commit }" command. so only we have commit > force > >> option supported for replace-brick command. > >> > >> Should we have new command "gluster volume replace-brick <VOLNAME> > >> <SOURCE-BRICK> <NEW-BRICK>" instead of having "gluster volume > replace-brick > >> <VOLNAME> <SOURCE-BRICK> <NEW-BRICK> commit force" command. > >> > >> > >> Thanks & Regards > >> Gaurav Garg > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gluster-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gluster-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > AFAIK, it was never the plan to remove 'replace-brick commit force'. > The plan was always to retain it while removing the unsupported and > unneeded options, ie 'replace-brick (start|pause|abort|status)'. > > Gaurav, your change is attempting to do the correct thing already and > needs no changes (other than any that arise via the review process). > > I agree with Kelvin and Kaushal. We should retain "commit force"; "force" brings the implicit meaning that I fully understand what I am asking to be done is not the norm, but do proceed and I hold myself responsible for anything bad that happens. ~kaushal > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > -- *Raghavendra Talur *
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
