On 20.10.2012 22:24, Tim Cook wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:54 AM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net>> wrote: > > On 10/20/2012 01:10 AM, Tim Cook wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net> > > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net>>> wrote: > > > > On 10/19/2012 09:58 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net> > > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net>> > > > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net> > <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net <mailto:sensi...@gmx.net>>>> wrote: > > > > > > We have finished a beta version of the feature. A webrev for > it > > > can be found here: > > > > > > http://cr.illumos.org/~webrev/sensille/fits-send/ > > > > > > It adds a command 'zfs fits-send'. The resulting streams can > > > currently only be received on btrfs, but more receivers will > > > follow. > > > It would be great if anyone interested could give it some > testing > > > and/or review. If there are no objections, I'll send a formal > > > webrev soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please don't bother changing libzfs (and proliferating the > copypasta > > > 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 not a fan of the name "FITS" but I suppose somebody else > already > > > named the format. If we are going to follow someone else's format > > > though, it at least needs to be well-documented. Where can we > > find the > > > documentation? > > > > > > FYI, #1 google hit for "FITS": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FITS > > > #3 hit: http://code.google.com/p/fits/ > > > > > > Both have to do with file formats. The entire first page of > google > > > results for "FITS format" and "FITS file format" are related to > these > > > two formats. "FITS btrfs" didn't return anything specific to the > file > > > format, either. > > > > It's not too late to change it, but I have a hard time coming up > with > > some better name. Also, the format is still very new and I'm sure > it'll > > need some adjustments. > > > > -arne > > > > > > > > --matt > > > > > > > > I'm sure we can come up with something. Are you planning on this being > > solely for ZFS, or a larger architecture for replication both directions > > in the future? > > We have senders for zfs and btrfs. The planned receiver will be mostly > filesystem agnostic and can work on a much broader range. It basically > only needs to know how to create snapshots and where to store a few > meta informations. > It would be great if more filesystems would join on the sending side, > but I have no involvement there. > > I see no basic problem in choosing a name that's already in use. > Especially with file extensions most will be already taken. How about > something with 'portable' and 'backup', like pib or pibs? 'i' for > incremental. > > -Arne > > > Re-using names generally isn't a big deal, but in this case the existing name > is > a technology that's extremely similar to what you're doing - which WILL cause > a > ton of confusion in the userbase, and make troubleshooting far more difficult > when searching google/etc looking for links to documents that are applicable. > > > Maybe something like far - filesystem agnostic replication?
I like that one. It has a nice connotation to 'remote'. So 'far' it be. Thanks! -Arne _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss