On 10/10/07, Doug Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would be nice to have some zones 'or a group' which are > independent of the global zone and can be patches/updated together. > Is this a good idea or is there another way of achieving the same > goals.
I would be especially fond of full-root zone that was patched independently from the global zone and a mechanism existed to just be sure that the minimum set of dependencies were met. For example, be sure that there is not a libc vs. kernel mismatch. This seems likely to be a branded zone, but I haven't looked into it much. Use case: Consider a group of machines with the following characteristics: - Minimized global zone (just enough to manage server and boot zones) - Zonepaths on shared storage (e.g. iSCSI, QFS, or similar) - A framework to manage where the zones run Things that could be done: - Zones could easily migrate to another machine so long as dependencies are met (or to meet new dependencies) - A tool substantially similar to live upgrade could be used to patch zones. - The global zones across the various machines could be patched, upgraded, or replaced as a rolling operation with only one short outage to each zone. - Patching and upgrades can be done to one or many zones at a time. That is, we would no longer be stuck with the current method that forces all zones on a box to be patched serially during one long outage to all zones on that box. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
