ZFS problems

[Glen Barber]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:37:47PM -0800, Xin Li wrote:
> > In mid-February, zpool version was upgraded to include
> > lz4_compress.  My understanding was that changing from the
> > OpenSolaris ZFS version number scheme (i.e., "v28") to what we have
> > on -CURRENT (i.e., "5000") was so that we can track crossing the
> > point of no return with pool version upgrades.
> > 
> > On my system, vfs.zfs.version.spa has been at 5000 since this
> > original change.
> > 
> > Is my understanding incorrect?  Or should vfs.zfs.version.spa be 
> > incremented with major, non-backwards-compatible changes?
> 
> That's incorrect.  In theory vfs.zfs.version.spa will never ever
> change in the future, and all new features will be denoted by feature
> flags, which is an extensible way of representing features and whether
> they are compatible with the running system.
> 

Thank you for clarifying.

As there does not seem to be a specific sysctl that we can look for,
I am inclined to say there should be UPDATING entries for such changes
to note (at least for now) that 'make -C /usr/src/cddl install' can help
prevent foot shooting.

Thoughts?

Glen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20130227/96a3b177/attachment.sig>