Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 10:28:18 +0200 From: Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es> To: Robert Schulze <rs@bytecamp.net> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS API Message-ID: <7BD1DA91-6667-4183-B4C2-297FA1602703@sarenet.es> In-Reply-To: <5433F7B5.8090604@bytecamp.net> References: <1422065A4E115F409E22C1EC9EDAFBA46044E4@sofdc01exc02.postbank.bg> <1422065A4E115F409E22C1EC9EDAFBA4604B35@sofdc01exc02.postbank.bg> <757ED2D6-0585-43C1-B827-FB349045246A@pingpong.net> <1422065A4E115F409E22C1EC9EDAFBA4604B8D@sofdc01exc02.postbank.bg> <5433F7B5.8090604@bytecamp.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 7, 2014, at 4:24 PM, Robert Schulze wrote: > Am 07.10.2014 16:15, schrieb Ivailo A. Tanusheff: >> I want to achieve an automated snapshot creation/removal trough C = written daemon by myself. >> Obvious there is an API, but without proper documentation. >=20 > KISS. >=20 > This can easily be done with any scripting language/shell, no need to = code that in C. It depends on your goals. Relying on scripts running commands and = parsing their output is not what I would call sound software design. So much can go wrong. If you are just putting = together some tools do to some light work it's fine, though. The problem with the API is that, as far as I know, it is not stable. It = hasn't been defined as a valid interface to control ZFS, but just a convenience library and interface between the command = line tools and the underlying system. Hence, it can change completely even with an apparently minor update, so relying = on it is even worse than playing command parsing. It would be great to have a reliable API. Borja.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7BD1DA91-6667-4183-B4C2-297FA1602703>