Dave Miner wrote: > Frank Ludolph wrote: >> Dave Miner wrote: >>> Susan Sohn wrote: >>>> The notes from today's meeting are at: >>>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/auto_install/ai_client_redesign_mtg_0520.txt >>>> >>>> >>> >>> The concern I have is that the focus here seems to be too much on >>> the single-disk case, whereas the target systems for AI are highly >>> likely to be servers of some sort that will mostly have multiple disks. >>> >>> Given that, do you feel that the proposed design is really the right >>> one? >>> >> The discussion of the "single disk" case is actually what happens >> after a disk is selected. Given a system with multiple disks, one is >> (tentatively) selected and then the "single disk" considerations are >> applied. >> > > I expect that there are requirements to do partitioning, slicing, pool > creation, etc., on more than one disk target. Between that and the > unresolved issues in the notes about selecting a disk when there is > more than one, I'm concerned that it isn't quite covering the right set.
I agree multiple disk configuration should be on the table. Given the complexity it might be introduced, I think we would need to come with list of use cases to be supported. In general, I assume that multiple disk configuration will be used to create the single ZFS root pool which will be used as target for the installation - might it be this assumption correct or might it be other purposes for specifying and configuring more than one disk ? Speaking about multiple vdevs used for creating the root pool, based on the feedback received from users so far - the most common scenario seems to be utilizing two vdevs represented by two slices on two separate disks to establish RAID-1 mirrored configuration. Is it feasible to think about more than two vdevs in this use case ? Given the fact that this is the only mirrored configuration supported by ZFS for root pool at this point, could we consider other scenarios - e.g. ping ZFS team what is planned and make the design open/extensible enough to allow enhance it in easy way for supporting other configurations if/when they become reality ? Thank you, Jan
