On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Haynes, Tom wrote:
Is it a dumbing down or an automation of common steps? I know when I designed and coded the automatic writing of the /etc/exports, my goal was to remove some repetitive and manual steps.
First off, it's great that "toasters" is a list where implementers and other NetApp personnel can interact directly with customers. :-)
Secondly, it wasn't my intention to impune your motives or programming skills; it's more that this was a very unexpected change, and in watching ONTAP evolve since its very earliest days, I've been accustomed to new releases adhering to the "principle of least surprise". I scoured the release notes for 6.5.x when upgrading my last filer from 6.3.x, and carefully reviewed the parts about changes in the /etc/exports file - but I swear I can't remember seeing anything about the "vol" commands going in and changing the file...
Some of the posters on this thread make it sound like this was a conspiracy.
Heh heh.
[snip]
I've been of the flat file bent myself for a long time. Now that I have to maintain the exports file, I'm leaning towards a database for it. There is just too much ambiguity in parsing entries in the host lists - well formed fields, like *shudder* XML, make too much sense.
That's been a general argument in the Unix world for a long time - too many different flat files, too many different formats - but overcoming that interia has proven very difficult. I guess I'd suggest that if you stick with the flat file, then don't mess with the flat file; if you use the database format instead, then make it _clear_ that the database replaces or overrides the text file.
Kinda like moving more and more things out of /etc/rc into "persistent options" - as an old school Unix guy I still prefer to see and manage how things start up, and it was a little discouraging to have more and more things pulled out - we're almost at the point where /etc/rc ought to just be removed entirely (and I assume that's the development trajectory?) since it does so little. That's just one less mysterious text file for Windows admins to worry about - and one more adjustment for the (dwindling?) base of Unix guys to make.
Anyway, there is no global plan to dumb down the product - just local designs to reduce problems found in customer escalations.
Well, forgive an old cranky geek like me, but I still like to get under the hood, learn about and understand the product and its complexity, and be able to do the tuning and tweaking necessary to get the most out of the machine. It's _great_ that filers are so easy to set up and use, and I'm all for making improvements where needed. But I get concerned when "ease of use" features encroach upon or conflict with the already established ways of doing things that, in my opinion, don't need fixing.
-- Chris Unix snob and 8-year ONTAP admin :-)