On Oct 16, 2006, at 07:39, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Noel Dellofano wrote:
I don't understand why you can't use 'zpool status'? That will
show the pools and the physical devices in each and is also a
pretty basic command. Examples are given in the sysadmin docs and
manpages for ZFS on the
Noel Dellofano wrote:
I don't understand why you can't use 'zpool status'? That will show
the pools and the physical devices in each and is also a pretty basic
command. Examples are given in the sysadmin docs and manpages for ZFS
on the opensolaris ZFS community page.
I realize it's not qu
On Oct 13, 2006, at 4:55 PM, Bruce Chapman wrote:
ZFS is supposed to be much easier to use than UFS.
For creating a filesystem, I agree it is, as I could do that easily
without a man page.
However, I found it rather surprising that I could not see the
physical device(s) a zfs filesystem w
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Noel,
Friday, October 13, 2006, 11:22:06 PM, you wrote:
ND> I don't understand why you can't use 'zpool status'? That will show
ND> the pools and the physical devices in each and is also a pretty basic
ND> command. Examples are given in the sysadmin docs and man
Hello Noel,
Friday, October 13, 2006, 11:22:06 PM, you wrote:
ND> I don't understand why you can't use 'zpool status'? That will show
ND> the pools and the physical devices in each and is also a pretty basic
ND> command. Examples are given in the sysadmin docs and manpages for
ND> ZFS on the
I don't understand why you can't use 'zpool status'? That will show
the pools and the physical devices in each and is also a pretty basic
command. Examples are given in the sysadmin docs and manpages for
ZFS on the opensolaris ZFS community page.
I realize it's not quite the same command
ZFS is supposed to be much easier to use than UFS.
For creating a filesystem, I agree it is, as I could do that easily without a
man page.
However, I found it rather surprising that I could not see the physical
device(s) a zfs filesystem was attached to using either "df" command (that
shows ph
