https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LUDOC-59 Lustre Documentation <p>lfs now supports <tt>poollist</tt> and <tt>pool_list</tt>. The manual uses both - but uses <tt>poollist</tt> more often. <tt>poollist</tt> is the consistent usage so the manual should eradicate use of the term <tt>pool_list</tt>.</p> LUDOC-59

poollist is the accepted usage of pool_list.

Improvement Minor Closed Won't Fix Richard Henwood Richard Henwood Mon, 14 May 2012 19:22:51 +0000 Tue, 27 Nov 2012 07:16:51 +0000 Tue, 15 May 2012 13:15:53 +0000 0 0 <p>for review:</p> <p><a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/2735" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/2735</a></p> <p>Richard, I'm not sure I understand why you think "poollist" is preferable over "pool_list"? All of the other OST pools commands in the lctl tool are using "pool_*", for example "lctl pool_new", "lctl pool_add", "lctl pool_destroy", and also "lctl pool_list". </p> <p>The lfs tool (which is what is under discussion here) also has "lfs pool_list", which is consistent with all of those other commands, but this one for users to use.</p> <p>Ah, thanks for taking the time to provide this clarification.</p> <p>I was looking at <tt>lfs</tt>. All <tt>lfs</tt> commands that are a concatenation of two words do not have a underscore between them, except <tt>pool_list</tt>.</p> <p>The proposed change to the manual is for <tt>lctl</tt> - I didn't notice this. I will abandon this change and thank you for checking the details and taking time to explain to me.</p> <p>The change targetted <tt>lctl</tt> - which does use <tt>pool_*</tt> to keep consistency.</p> <p>While it doesn't make sense to change "lctl pool_list" to "lctl poollist" in the manual, are there cases where the "lfs pool_list" and "lfs poollist" are used inconsistently? I'd prefer to only have a single version documented everywhere (IMHO "lfs pool_list", since this is the only version that has actually worked), and only allow "lfs poollist" for a limited time for those few people that read the manual...</p> <p>In further reflection on this issue, I think "lfs pool_list" is the preferred usage, to match all of the other "lctl pool_*" commands.</p> <p>While it is true that "lfs poollist" was documented in both the user manual and the "lfs.1" man page, the "lfs pool_list" command is the only one that has been working this whole time. By the time that this patch is landed in a release there is no value to start accepting the "poollist" variant when we could have just fixed the documentation to match the actual usage. There can't really have been any population of existing users using "lfs poollist", which is the normal reason to accept multiple variants of a command. </p> <p><a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-1364" title="lfs &#39;poollist&#39; is incorrectly recognised as &#39;pool_list&#39; by lfs, the lfs manpage and the Manual." class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LU-1364"><del>LU-1364</del></a> should instead be changed to update the lfs.1 man page (for master, b1_8, b2_1, and b2_2), which can be done with less risk than introducing a code change. The <a href="https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LUDOC-59" title="poollist is the accepted usage of pool_list." class="issue-link" data-issue-key="LUDOC-59"><del>LUDOC-59</del></a> change should document the proper usage in the user manual, and will have immediate benefit to all users, including those on older releases of Lustre, where the "lfs poollist" command does not exist.</p> Development Rank 1|hzvky7: Rank (Obsolete) 7155