Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 22:45:03 -0700 From: Matthew Ahrens <mahrens@delphix.com> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com> Cc: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: zfs: the exponential file system from hell Message-ID: <CAJjvXiExsyrzMYTe19fi9y4%2BVxnfwkDWOdbRPUFBdjaZgo2F-g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <BFAE1DDE-B8F8-40E5-9D9B-CF954D5D6457@mail.turbofuzz.com> References: <52457A32.2090105@fsn.hu> <77F6465C-4E76-4EE9-88B5-238FFB4E0161@sarenet.es> <20130930234401.GA68360@neutralgood.org> <BFAE1DDE-B8F8-40E5-9D9B-CF954D5D6457@mail.turbofuzz.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com>wrot= e: > > On Sep 30, 2013, at 4:44 PM, kpneal@pobox.com wrote: > > > Bottom line: > > The replacement for the 'df' command when using ZFS is 'zfs list'. > > Given that we have the sources to df, I guess we should consider the > question begged: Do we want to change it to DTRT for zfs filesystems? > There's no Unix Law=99 that says "df(1) must use the output of statfs(2) > directly and can use no longer sources of information!" > > At the end of the day, df(1) is just a convenient status reporting tool > aimed at human consumption. It could easily reach out to "zfs list" for > the data it prints for zfs volumes if what's reported by statfs(2) just > isn't suitable. > Indeed. This is what illumos df(1) does, so that the "Size" reported is the size of the pool, rather than the "Used + Available" of the individual filesystem. It would be great to get a similar change in gnu df (which is also used on many illumos distros). https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/blob/master/usr/src/cmd/fs.d/df.c#L= 1236-1306 --matt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJjvXiExsyrzMYTe19fi9y4%2BVxnfwkDWOdbRPUFBdjaZgo2F-g>