On 22.10.2012 06:32, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms 
> <mailto:t...@cook.ms>> 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?   
> 
> 
> All else being equal, I like this name (FAR).  It ends in "AR" like several
> other archive formats (TAR, WAR, JAR).  Plus not a lot of false positives when
> googling around for it.   
> 
> However, if compatibility with the existing format is an explicit goal, we
> should use the same name, and the btrfs authors may be averse to changing the 
> name.

There's really nothing to keep. In the btrfs world, like in the zfs world, the
stream has no special name, it's just a 'btrfs send stream', like the 'zfs send
stream'. The necessity for a name only arises from the wish to build a bridge
between the worlds.
The author of btrfs is also fine with 'far'.

-Arne

> 
> --matt

_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to