Cordel
Dabbler
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2012
- Messages
- 22
Okay so I had to actually wipe my first drives in FN, and I started thinking, I know I probably should do that but here it is. :p
It would be really nice to have the ability to select multiple drives to be wiped and have the status go to a ajax/json frame next to the console messages in the footer of pending and processing items which might be useful else where as well later down the road and allow the ability to use the web interface while those jobs are processing.
Also the option to do a DoD 5220.22-M type wipe as an option would be simply delightful.
The other point is that the View Disk tab/screen does not display in the table if the disk is part of a zvol. Kind of spooky to have a wipe button in the current table. So maybe another tab explicitly for the function of wiping drives. Then for the really paranoid that do not like to wipe drives on a production system, a check box under Settings/Advanced to enable/disable access to this tab.
I do know that DBAN harddisk eraser www.dban.org is always an option, though I don't do this at home enough to set up a single machine just for this function.
Also instead of a single click option, it could pop up a request for the admin password with a flashing bold red caption stating that you are about to wipe the following table of drives and will forever lose your data. I think that a single click option is dangerous. The selection screen could be made where it would only list drives that are not part of a zvol/aggregate though so your not looking at a screen of all the drives in the system to select from which would be better than the view disks screen currently used that don't even tell you if the disk is part of a set or not. This could be later extended so that as each volume goes offline a check is run to insure the offlined drive has not caused a degraded set, or halt the process though this should be barley trivial as there should already be a table of drives that are in use as a data set and never show in the selection table in the first place.
Let me know if this sounds fiesible and I'll add the request and detail to the bug tracker.
Regards.
It would be really nice to have the ability to select multiple drives to be wiped and have the status go to a ajax/json frame next to the console messages in the footer of pending and processing items which might be useful else where as well later down the road and allow the ability to use the web interface while those jobs are processing.
Also the option to do a DoD 5220.22-M type wipe as an option would be simply delightful.
The other point is that the View Disk tab/screen does not display in the table if the disk is part of a zvol. Kind of spooky to have a wipe button in the current table. So maybe another tab explicitly for the function of wiping drives. Then for the really paranoid that do not like to wipe drives on a production system, a check box under Settings/Advanced to enable/disable access to this tab.
I do know that DBAN harddisk eraser www.dban.org is always an option, though I don't do this at home enough to set up a single machine just for this function.
Also instead of a single click option, it could pop up a request for the admin password with a flashing bold red caption stating that you are about to wipe the following table of drives and will forever lose your data. I think that a single click option is dangerous. The selection screen could be made where it would only list drives that are not part of a zvol/aggregate though so your not looking at a screen of all the drives in the system to select from which would be better than the view disks screen currently used that don't even tell you if the disk is part of a set or not. This could be later extended so that as each volume goes offline a check is run to insure the offlined drive has not caused a degraded set, or halt the process though this should be barley trivial as there should already be a table of drives that are in use as a data set and never show in the selection table in the first place.
Let me know if this sounds fiesible and I'll add the request and detail to the bug tracker.
Regards.