On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:12:33AM -0800, Frank Batschulat wrote:
Hey Ed, I want to comment on the NFS aspects involed here,
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
well, it all depends on what nfs shares are actually being exported.
I definitively think we do want to
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 02:47:37PM -0800, Frank Batschulat wrote:
Hey Ed, addition to my previous posting as I just noticed something I've
totally
forgotten about
afaik, determining the mount point should be pretty
strait forward. i was planning to get a list of all the shares
Hey Ed, I want to comment on the NFS aspects involed here,
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
well, it all depends on what nfs shares are actually being exported.
I definitively think we do want to abstain from that much programmatic
attempts inside the Zones framework
Hey Ed, addition to my previous posting as I just noticed something I've totally
forgotten about
afaik, determining the mount point should be pretty
strait forward. i was planning to get a list of all the shares
exported by the specified nfs server, and then do a strncmp() of all the
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 09:33:11PM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
there by implying that the vdisk path is a directory. ok. that's easy
Right.
enough to detect.
It's probably safer to directly use vdiskadm to sniff the directory, if
you can.
At import time, it's a combination of
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 04:25:30PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 09:33:11PM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
there by implying that the vdisk path is a directory. ok. that's easy
Right.
enough to detect.
It's probably safer to directly use vdiskadm to sniff the
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:23:21AM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
if we only support vdisks created via vdiskadm(1m), then we'll always
have a directory and we can always use vdiskadm(1m) to sniff out if it's
a valid vdisk and access it as such.
then for the implicit creation case we'll
thanks for taking the time to look at this and sorry for the delay in
replying. my comments are line below.
ed
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 11:13:07PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 04:55:15PM +0800, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
File storage objects:
path:///file-absolute
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 04:34:06PM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
thanks for taking the time to look at this and sorry for the delay in
replying.
Compared to /my/ delay...
That is, I think vdisks should just use path:/// and nfs:// not have
their own special schemes.
this is easy
hey illya,
thanks for reviewing this and sorry for the delay in replying.
my comments are inline below.
i've also attached a document that contains some of the design doc
sections i've revised based of your (and john's) feedback. since the
document is large, i've only included sections that
Hi Edward,
See comments and questions below inline:
1. Section C.0
... That said, nothing in this proposal should not prevent us from adding
support for...
That not before prevent is superfluous.
2. Section C.1.i
How many instances of rootzpool and zpool resources is permitted?
IMO zero or
Hi Edward,
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 03:03, Edward
Pilatowiczedward.pilatow...@sun.com wrote:
i posted the latest version to our aliases in may after i incorporated
mike's feedback, but digging throught the archives i couldn't find any
decent readable copy. hence i've gone ahead and posted the
Hello Edward and Mike,
I've just discovered your thread from May 2009.
Do you have any updates on the subject?
I would like to read the latest version of the proposal.
Where can I find it?
--
Illya Kysil
--
EASY is the word you use to describe other people's job.
hey illya,
i posted the latest version to our aliases in may after i incorporated
mike's feedback, but digging throught the archives i couldn't find any
decent readable copy. hence i've gone ahead and posted the latest
version to zones community site here:
hey mike,
thanks for all the great feedback.
my replies to your individual comments are inline below.
i've updated my proposal to include your feedback, but i'm unable to
attach it to this reply because of mail size restrictions imposed by
this alias. i'll send some follow up emails which
[ third reply, includes revised proposal + change bars from previous
version ]
hey mike,
thanks for all the great feedback.
my replies to your individual comments are inline below.
i've updated my proposal to include your feedback, but i'm unable to
attach it to this reply because of mail
comments inline below.
ed
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:26:06AM -0500, Mike Gerdts wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:57 AM, Edward Pilatowicz
edward.pilatow...@sun.com wrote:
i've attached an updated version of the proposal (v1.1) which addresses
your feedback. (i've also attached a second
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Edward Pilatowicz
edward.pilatow...@sun.com wrote:
hey all,
i've created a proposal for my vision of how zones hosted on shared
storage should work. if anyone is interested in this functionality then
please give my proposal a read and let me know what you
18 matches
Mail list logo
