Details
-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Critical
-
Lustre 2.8.0
-
None
-
3
-
16862
Description
"lfs mv" caused some confusion between mv and lfs mv. So we better to change lfs mv to lfs migrate -M.
[12/18/14, 2:50:08 PM] Andreas Dilger: we could still use "lfs migrate -M {mdt_idx} /path/to/file" to migrate files across MDTs if everyone thinks "lfs mv" is a bad name for the command?
[12/18/14, 2:52:34 PM] Andreas Dilger: like "lfs migrate -i {ost_idx} /path/to/file" is to migrate objects across OSTs
[12/18/14, 2:53:01 PM] wangdi: yes, we can do that. or just use lfs mdt_migrate as John suggested
[12/18/14, 2:53:48 PM] wangdi: but lfs migrate is bounded with lfs_setstripe, not sure whether add another parameter is good thing
[12/18/14, 2:53:50 PM] wangdi: {"migrate", lfs_setstripe, 0, "migrate file from one OST layout to "
"another (may be not safe with concurent writes).\n"
[12/18/14, 2:54:31 PM] wangdi: anyway, either way is fine to me
[12/18/14, 2:58:14 PM] Andreas Dilger: Di: lfs_migrate() could parse the "-M" option before calling lfs_setstripe() if just migrating the inode. if it is migrating the objects also, then we may as well just use lfs_setstripe() and create the volatile file on the right MDT in the first place.