Will the <logical> tag be required in all cases where a disk has been
specified, or can/will we infer that in the simple cases? The use case
I'm thinking of is when a user specifies a single device (disk) to be
used by AI.
<target>
<disk>
<disk_keyword key="boot_disk" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
</target>
thanks,
-ethan
On 01/19/11 04:11, Darren Kenny wrote:
On 18/01/2011 22:18, Dave Miner wrote:
On 01/18/11 03:34 PM, Drew Fisher wrote:
Dave,
In general, I like this, as it does require less artificial naming of
objects. A couple of things.
1. The zpool attribute on the disk_name element would seemingly be
redundant if the vdev names were required to be unique across all
pools in the manifest. Undecided whether that's a good thing or not.
We could perhaps make the zpool attribute optional, only required if
the vdev names are not unique.
I don't think we should enforce the zpool name in the vdev label. I did
that for readability, but as you'll see below, it's not necessary. I
would be concerned that users wouldn't follow that naming convention and
it could cause all kinds of issues.
I wasn't suggesting that we enforce that a pool name is part of the vdev
attribute, just noting that the vdev name is likely sufficient in the
usual case. It's just the "leaf" of a "path", in other words, and if
the leaves are all uniquely named, you don't need the whole path and can
handle it like SMF handles service names or pkg handles package names.
Eliminating unnecessary verbosity seems helpful here.
I totally agree here, if there is a vdev name, then it should be enough and you
should really omit the zpool.
As I said in another e-mail, as long as you can uniquely identify the vdev to
add a disk to, then it should be all ok, otherwise it should fail validation.
So a failure would be where you specify a zpool, but not a vdev, when the zpool
definition has two vdevs groupings in it, i.e:
<target>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t0d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<logical>
<zpool name="rpool" action="create" is_root="true">
<vdev name="root_mirror" redundancy="mirror"/>
<vdev name="root_spare" redundancy="spare"/>
</zpool>
</logical>
</target>
A success would be where you specify a zpool, but not a vdev, and the zpool only
has one vdev grouping in it.
<target>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t0d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<logical>
<zpool name="rpool" action="create" is_root="true">
<vdev name="root_mirror" redundancy="mirror"/>
</zpool>
</logical>
</target>
In fact, in this last one, if you wanted to use the default redundancy of a
zpool, then you could totally omit the<vdev> element:
<target>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t0d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c3t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<disk>
<disk_name name="c4t1d0" name_type="ctd" zpool="rpool"/>
</disk>
<logical>
<zpool name="rpool" action="create" is_root="true" />
</logical>
</target>
Thanks,
Darren.
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
