From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 20 20:30:01 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D018263 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FB50DE1 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r3KKU1xr001301 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r3KKU1uu001300; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 GMT Message-Id: <201304202030.r3KKU1uu001300@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Andriy Gapon Subject: Re: kern/177985: [zfs] disk usage problem when copying from one zfs dataset to another on the same pool using mv command X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Andriy Gapon List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:30:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/177985; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andriy Gapon To: Jon Cc: "bug-followup@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: kern/177985: [zfs] disk usage problem when copying from one zfs dataset to another on the same pool using mv command Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:25:40 +0300 on 20/04/2013 22:49 Jon said the following: > This is not a bug, it is a workflow problem introduced by the difference in > behavior between ZFS datasets and fixed sized file systems. > > You should be able to move files from one dataset to another on the same pool > without having to copy it to another pool and back. You lost me at 'another pool'. Perhaps moving an object from one zfs dataset to another could be optimized, but... That would definitely require zfs-specific tools. It is not implemented in the code yet, as far as I know. > This all can be > accomplished by deleting copied files more often than it currently does or at > least adding a flag to turn on synchronized deletes. No, it can not be accomplished that way, because it would violate how mv(1) across filesystems works. Perhaps it's indeed the time to read the man page? > After I am done testing the same scenario on Solaris I will run the test > Steve suggested. Yes, please do. Personal experience is always more enlightening that someone else's words. > On Apr 20, 2013, at 3:12 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> >> Sorry, but I do not see any bug reported here. mv behaves as it is >> expected/documented to behave. ZFS behaves as it should as well. If the >> behavior is surprising to you then please update your knowledge of the >> tools. If you need a different behavior then you can script it yourself or >> use different tools to accomplish your job. >> >> -- Andriy Gapon -- Andriy Gapon