Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:38:27 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/8] perf buildid-cache: Add clean command |
| |
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 05:13:06PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Arnaldo and Jiri, > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > <acme@redhat.com> wrote: > > Em Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 01:25:18PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > >> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 08:29:19PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > >> SNIP > > > >> > [acme@sandy wb]$ > > > >> > If we keep the way it is, I think it would be clearer to add a -l/--list > >> > command and that would: > > > >> > perf buildid-cache --list # list all the files in the cache > >> > perf buildid-cache --list 3d # list 3 days old files > >> > perf buildid-cache --list +3d # list files 3 days or more older > >> > perf buildid-cache --list -3d # list files up to 3 days old > > > >> ok, I was up to old files (and big files) removal only.. not sure > >> the other way will be actually needed.. but it's easy enought to > >> add > > > > Right, I was thinking something along the lines of checking how much > > space would be needed if I wanted to keep X days of cache, not how much > > space I would free if I purged files older than Y days. > > Btw, which timestamp do you use for the checking? It'd be great if we > can use atime but some system might use the noatime..
I used atime.. will need to check, I wasnt aware of this
SNIP
> > > >> > > >> > > Remove and display items bigger than 200M > >> > > $ perf buildid-cache clean -r -a 200M > > > >> > But yeah, perhaps we could switch to having subcommands and add: > > > >> > perf buildid-cache [add|remove|update|list] > > > >> > What do you think? > > > >> yep, those commands seem nicer.. > > > >> let's see of there're other comments and I'll come up with > >> new interface after.. > > I also like the subcommand style.. What about git-like format to > specify time range? > > perf buildid-cache list --since '3 days ago' > perf buildidi-cache remove --before '1 month ago'
yea, thats more readable, I'll check git sources.. hopefully they use this in some steal-able way ;-)
jirka
| |