hi Rich,
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 10:51 -0500, Richard Morris - Sun Microsystems -
Burlington United States wrote:
> As you point out, the -c option is user friendly while the -depth (or
> maybe -d) option is more general. There have been several requests for
> the -c option. Would anyone prefer the -depth option? In what cases
> would this be used?
I was thinking when I logged the bug, that -depth (or -d) would be
useful in cases where you've got a "jurassic-like" filesystem layout,
and are interested in seeing just one or two levels.
zfs list -d 3 tank
tank/home
tank/home/Ireland
tank/home/UK
tank/home/France
tank/home/Germany
tank/foo
tank/foo/bar
allowing you to look at just the level of hierarchy that you're
interested in (eg. "How much disk space are users from different
countries taking up taking up?"), without needing to grep, or hardcode
a list of datasets somewhere.
More importantly, with hopefully faster performance than showing
all children of tank/home just to get the size of the immediate children.
It's particularly important for snapshots - as the number of snapshots
grows, zfs list without limits like this can take a long time (even with
the massive zfs list performance improvements :-)
[ hacks around listing the contents of .zfs/snapshots/ only work when
filesystems are mounted unfortunately, so I'd been avoiding doing that
in the zfs-auto-snapshot code ]
cheers,
tim
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
