On Feb 29, 2008, at 12:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Managled is understated. If it said partitions instead of disks it
might
make more sense to me. But in my case, I have only one volume/dasd/
disk
with 1 boot partition and 1 logical volume partition. So when you
bring a
cloned volume/dasd/disk online he must compare the NEW "real addr"
to the
by-id label. But, if use by-path he doesn't? Sorry still a little
confused
about this. What is wrong with old naming conventions?
By-id has *nothing* to do with the device address. It's a terrible
idea in a virtualized environment--it tries to synthesize a unique ID
from characteristics of the real device it can figure out. This makes
cloning impossible. It should not have been the default in SLES for
s390x.
By-path is the one that corresponds to the device address. You can
clone *that* and as long as your device definitions don't change
across guests you're fine. It's the one most of us here are
recommending.
/dev/dasdXp1 is fine, except that if you add a device with a lower
device address and aren't very careful about how you force device
detection order in zipl.conf, then you will end up being very sorry
when your new device shows up as /dev/dasda and bumps your older
devices down the chain so that /etc/fstab no longer works. In a VM
environment, by-path is usually the addressing method most likely to
stay constant.
Adam
