Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 19:07:23 +0100 From: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: "Allan Jude" <allanjude@freebsd.org>, "Warren Block" <wblock@wonkity.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Benedict Reuschling <bcr@freebsd.org>, Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [patch] zfs sysctl patch Message-ID: <7B1E8F19FEE443B7AAAD7C9B2DDB5928@multiplay.co.uk> References: <537D7431.4070103@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1405212222170.28790@wonkity.com> <7B840D2D10124A4FAC40C69E91E6C20D@multiplay.co.uk> <537E340B.5040108@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allan Jude" <allanjude@freebsd.org>
> Did the name of the sysctl vfs.zfs.dirty_data_max_max come from OpenZFS
> or did we pick that?
>
> If it is ours, I would suggest changing it to dirty_data_max_limit
> because '*_max_max' is confusing and a bit misleading.
Yes, the sysctls mirror the names of the ZFs variables they effect, which
are set by different means in other implementations. So it is best we keep
them the same so when users are searching about information for a setting
they get the richest set of results.
Regards
Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7B1E8F19FEE443B7AAAD7C9B2DDB5928>