On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 10/20/2012 01:21 AM, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net
> > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net>> wrote:
> > On 10/19/2012 09:58 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> > > Please don't bother changing libzfs (and proliferating the
> > > there) -- do it like lzc_send().
> > >
> > ok. It would be easier though if zfs_send would also already use the
> > new style. Is it in the pipeline already?
> > > Likewise, zfs_ioc_fits_send should use the new-style API. See the
> > > comment at the beginning of zfs_ioctl.c.
> > I'm saying to use lzc_send() as an example, rather than zfs_send().
> > lzc_send() already uses the new style. I don't see how your job would
> > be made easier by converting zfs_send().
> Yeah, but the zfs util still uses the old version.
True, but it needs to do lots of crazy stuff (e.g. zfs rename; properties),
which isn't supported by your routines.
> > It would be nice to convert ZFS_IOC_SEND to the new IOCTL format
> > someday, but I don't think that the complexities of zfs_send() would be
> > appropriate for libzfs_core. Programmatic consumers typically know
> > exactly what snapshots they want sent and would prefer the clean error
> > handling of lzc_send().
> What I meant was if you want the full-blown zfs send-functionality with
> the ton of options, it would be much easier to reuse the existing logic
> and only call *_send_fits instead of *_send when requested.
> If you're content with just the -i option I've currently implemented,
> it's certainly easy to convert. I on my part have mostly programmatic
I think it would be hard to make the full-blown zfs send work in
a receiving-platform-agnostic way -- it's just too ZFS specific
(e.g. hierarchical filesystems, each of our properties (checksum, copies,
aclmode, ...). As long as we are starting anew with nothing to be
compatibile with, might as well keep it simple.
zfs-discuss mailing list