[lustre-discuss] lfs find
nclark at whamcloud.com
Fri May 3 12:35:18 PDT 2019
That would mean the union of `lfs find --pool HDD /mnt/lustre` and `lfs
find ! --pool HDD /mnt/lustre` would NOT be ALL files. I agree a
semantic for finding files that are have no elements in a pool would be
useful, I think using a not operator where it's not the inverse would be
Can I suggest something like `lfs find --outside-pool HDD`?
On 4/26/19 11:35 AM, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
> during a discussion of a bug in lfs find, an improvement idea appeared, it is well
> described by Andreas below, and this thread is to discuss which options may need this
>> On 26 Apr 2019, at 03:41, Andreas Dilger <adilger at whamcloud.com> wrote:
>> lfs find ! --pool HDD ...
>> should IMHO find files that do not have any instantiated components in pool HDD, rather than files that have any component not on HDD.
>> That said, I could imagine that we may need to make some parameters more flexible, like adding "--pool =<poolname>" to allow specifying all components on the specified pool, and possibly + to specify "at least one component" (which would be the same as without "+" but may be more clear to some users)?
>> A similar situation arose with "-mode" for regular find (any vs. all bits) that took a while to sort out, so we should learn from what they did and get it right.
> Vitaly Fertman
> lustre-discuss mailing list
> lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
Senior Software Engineer
Whamcloud / DDN
More information about the lustre-discuss