Re: RFC: flags and --yes-i-really-mean-it

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/09/2018 05:48 PM, Jesse Williamson wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I'm adding a feature to allow groups of flags to be set or unset (e.g.
> "ceph osd set noup norecover noscrub"). Some of these flags (such as
> "recovery_deletes") require the user passing "--yes-i-really-mean-it"
> (YIRMI) on the command line in addition to requesting setting the flag
> before they will operate.
> 
> What do we want the behavior to be in the case where a user tries to set
> multiple flags that require YIRMI? Here are the possibilities I've
> considered so far:
> 
> 1) We can take a single YIRMI to imply approval for any such flags;
> 2) We can refuse to set groups of flags in the presence of a single
> YIRMI (i.e. a single YIRMI causes all sets to be rejected);
> 3) We can require an individual YIRMI for each flag that requires it
> (one for each flag);
> 4) We have have two commands (currently implemented): the existing "set"
> behavior handles a single flag and YIRMI as it currently does, and a new
> "setall" command only handles non-YIRMI flags.
> 
> What of those (or some other behavior) sounds most correct to everyone?

#1 seems the correct one. I think it's reasonable to expect that a
single `yes I really mean it` flag will be applicable to all flags being
set/unset.

  -Joao
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux