Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

zpool wait: print timestamp before the header #15825

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 26, 2024

Conversation

robn
Copy link
Contributor

@robn robn commented Jan 26, 2024

Motivation and Context

zpool list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header, but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Description

Just moves the print up.

How Has This Been Tested?

By hand. Before:

$ ./zpool wait -T u lucy 1
  DISCARD    FREE  INITIALIZE  REPLACE  REMOVE  RESILVER   SCRUB    TRIM  RAIDZ_EXPAND
1706247328
        0       0           0        0       0         0       0       0             0

after:

$ ./zpool wait -T u lucy 1
1706247336
  DISCARD    FREE  INITIALIZE  REPLACE  REMOVE  RESILVER   SCRUB    TRIM  RAIDZ_EXPAND
        0       0           0        0       0         0       0       0             0

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Performance enhancement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
  • Code cleanup (non-breaking change which makes code smaller or more readable)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Library ABI change (libzfs, libzfs_core, libnvpair, libuutil and libzfsbootenv)
  • Documentation (a change to man pages or other documentation)

Checklist:

list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header,
but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Reported-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
Signed-off-by: Rob Norris <robn@despairlabs.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@behlendorf behlendorf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@behlendorf behlendorf added the Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested) label Jan 26, 2024
@behlendorf behlendorf merged commit 884a48d into openzfs:master Jan 26, 2024
23 of 25 checks passed
behlendorf pushed a commit to behlendorf/zfs that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header,
but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Reported-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Rob Norris <robn@despairlabs.com>
Closes openzfs#15825
behlendorf pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2024
list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header,
but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Reported-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Rob Norris <robn@despairlabs.com>
Closes #15825
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header,
but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Reported-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Rob Norris <robn@despairlabs.com>
Closes openzfs#15825
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
list, status and iostat all display the -T timestamp before the header,
but wait showed it after. Make it be like the others.

Reported-by: Kyle Evans <kevans@FreeBSD.org>
Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Signed-off-by: Rob Norris <robn@despairlabs.com>
Closes openzfs#15825
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants