Would you mind listing current lfs find options to help kickstart discussion?
It seems like I might want it for lots of them, maybe close to all - For example, stripe size seems at first (to me) it wouldn't be useful, but what if I want to check to see if anyone is using a weird stripe size? I expect stripe size to be 1 MiB, and if I can search for ! that, then I can find users who set weird stripe sizes and help them fix it. - Patrick ________________________________ From: lustre-discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of Vitaly Fertman <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 10:35:54 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [lustre-discuss] lfs find Hi during a discussion of a bug in lfs find, an improvement idea appeared, it is well described by Andreas below, and this thread is to discuss which options may need this functionality. > On 26 Apr 2019, at 03:41, Andreas Dilger <[email protected]> wrote: > > lfs find ! --pool HDD ... > > should IMHO find files that do not have any instantiated components in pool > HDD, rather than files that have any component not on HDD. > > That said, I could imagine that we may need to make some parameters more > flexible, like adding "--pool =<poolname>" to allow specifying all > components on the specified pool, and possibly + to specify "at least one > component" (which would be the same as without "+" but may be more clear to > some users)? > > A similar situation arose with "-mode" for regular find (any vs. all bits) > that took a while to sort out, so we should learn from what they did and get > it right. — Vitaly Fertman _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
_______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
