I think it should be a single command because the user is trying to diagnose the same problem - what persistent data is missing that is preventing system recovery? I'm not sure what the best name of the command is.
-Dan On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Kenneth Howe <[email protected]> wrote: > GEODE-1128 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-1128> requests > the addition of missing colocated region information to the gfsh show > missing-disk-stores command. This is of course doable, however with > additional information not directly related to disk stores, the command > name would be misleading. You may have missing colocated regions without > missing disk stores, or the converse, missing stores without missing > regions. > > So my question is: Should the command be renamed to better indicate the > types of information reported? While working on this Jira, I have been > using the new command name ‘show persistent-recovery-failures’. (Please > suggest a better name!) > > Alternatives to renaming the command are > 1) Do nothing with the command name. Add the missing colocated region > information, but leave the command name as is. > 2) Add a new command with both missing disk stores and missing colocated > regions, and leave the existing missing-disk-stores command as is. > > Looking for a consensus on the best approach. > > Thanks, > Ken Howe >
