[OpenAFS-devel] Patch for XML switch for vos examine

[Jason Edgecombe]

Steve Simmons wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
>
>   
>> On 4/19/2010 2:17 PM, Sanket Agarwal wrote:
>>
>> I would wrap this blob with
>>
>> <cell name="cellname">
>>     
>
> I'm torn on this one. You can't run vos e on more than one cell at a time, so don't see this as particularly useful in most circumstances. However, if it *is* decided that it should be useful, I'd implement as jaltman suggests - in particular, don't put the cell name inside the volume-specific detail.
>
> Similarly, data like server, server IP address and partition is largely redundant when you're dumping many volumes. My xml-foo is amazingly week, but something like
>
> <cellname="cellname">
>    <server=1>
>        <uuid="xxxx">
>        <ipv4list>
>           <ipv4="192.168.1.1">
>           <ipv4="10.0.0.1">
>        </ipv4list>
>        <partitions>
>            <vicepa="/vicepa">
>            <vicepb="/vicepb">
>        </partitions>
>    </server>
> </cellname>
> <volume>
>    <name>root.cell</name>
>    <id>536870915</id>
>    <server=1>
>    <partition="/vicepa">
>    ...
>
> would eliminate a helluva lot of redundancy. It might also be worthwhile to do this down to a vice partition level, eg,
>
> ...
>        <partitions>
>            <partition>
>               <partid="1">
>               <vicepa="/vicepa">
>            </partition>
>            <partition>
>               <partid=2>
>               <vicepb="/vicepb">
>            </partition>
>        </partitions>
> ...
> <volume>
>    <name>root.cell</name>
>    <id>536870915</id>
>    <partid=1>
>    ...
>
>   
>>> why <serv> and not <server>?
>>>       
>
> Ditto for partition vs part. Right now he's just using the tags as reported by -format. I suspect that 'serv' vs 'server' and 'part' vs 'partition' was intentional on the original author's part; it does make parsing of the original ascii output easier. I've used that distinction myself for that purpose.
>
> Steve_______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-devel mailing list
> OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
>
>   
would it be better to have <ip version="4" address="192.168.1.1" /> ?
Would that be better to anticipate ipv6?

Jason