Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Ivan Buetler wrote: Is this true for OpenSolaris? My experience: I was trying to upgrade from SunOS 5.11 snv_28 to SunOS 5.11 snv_54 where my NGZ zone roots were set to a zfs mount point like below: NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT zpool 93.8G 40.1G26K /zpool zpool/zones 3.50G 40.1G 1.68G /zpool/zones Upgrading to SNV_54 did not work for me (CD|DVD|Live-Upgrade). The install procedure was cancelled after it came to the NGZ ZFS setup part. However - I was enforced to to a full re-install of the whole OS. By this time, I decided to have an OS independent application setup: I decided to leave all my Non-Solaris apps within the following structure: NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT zpool 93.8G 40.1G26K /zpool zpool/applic2.40G 40.1G 2.40G /zpool/applic zpool/bin108M 40.1G 108M /zpool/bin zpool/data 644M 40.1G 644M /zpool/data zpool/logs 1.03G 40.1G 1.03G /zpool/logs This means, Apache, Tomcat, Bind DNS, Postfix, MySQL, Berkeley-DB, ... was installed using a prefix (e.g. ./configure --prefix=/zpool/applic/named) This gives me some independencies to the core OS located in /sbin; /usr/bin, ... After I moved all my apps into my own prefix path (ZFS mount poing), I did another full reinstall of the OS, where I found out that I should have backed up some files from the core OS before. Especially I should have backed up the following files from the GZ and all NGZ. a) /etc/hosts, /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/nsswitch.conf, /etc/resolv.conf b) /etc/hostname.XX, c) /etc/init.d/startup-scripts (my own releases) After I did another full setup (not upgrading), I created the zones using the famous zonemgr script and brought back all applications by just mounting the /zpool/applic/path into the NGZ path. This way, I was pretty fast in upgrading the whole system to a new Nevada build, even upgrading would be the preferred solution to me. I do not know if I with SNV_54, another upgrade from SNV_54 to SNV_55 is supported by OpenSolaris. That is why this thread is of interest to me. Ivan, I am not sure if I completely understand your configuration, but you can upgrade a system with zones that have delegated zfs datasets or where you just used lofs mounts to mount the zfs filesystems into the zone. This would apply when all you have is data or non-Solaris pkgs installed in the zfs filesystems. Since the upgrade code does not have to discover and mount the zfs filesystems to perform the upgrade of the OS, this type of configuration works fine. We would have to see your actual zonecfg info to be sure that you haven't set things up in a way that would prevent the upgrade though. Jerry ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Ivan Buetler wrote: Jerry, Thank you for your response. See my zonecfg of the named NGZ here: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ # zonecfg -z named export create -b set zonepath=/zpool/zones/named set autoboot=true add inherit-pkg-dir set dir=/lib end add inherit-pkg-dir set dir=/platform end add inherit-pkg-dir set dir=/sbin end add inherit-pkg-dir set dir=/usr end add fs set dir=/zpool/applic/bind-9.3.2-P1 set special=/zpool/applic/bind-9.3.2-P1/ set type=lofs add options ro add options nodevices end add fs set dir=/zpool/data/named set special=/zpool/data/named set type=lofs add options rw add options nodevices end add net set address=1.2.3.4/27 set physical=qfe3 end add net set address=21.2.3.5/27 set physical=qfe3 end add net set address=10.10.10.10/24 set physical=qfe4 end add attr set name=comment set type=string set value=Zone named end It looks like you won't be able to upgrade. Assuming /zpool is the mount of your zfs zpool, then your zonepath is on a zfs dataset so this is the exact issue that upgrade cannot handle yet. If you were to place your zones on a UFS filesystem then the other fs entries you have to mount zfs datasets within the zone would be fine. Jerry ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many thanks for answering my question. Hopefully my noisy X4200 will be installed in the data centre tomorrow (Thursday); I had a set back today while fighting with the Remote Console feature of ILOM 1.1.1 (i.e., it doesn't work). :-( Just ssh into it and use the serial console from within SSH. That's how I usually use the console on the X4200. However, that arrangement doesn't work when one wants to (re)install Solaris. Unless there's a way of telling the installer to use the serial console while booting from DVD, rather than using the GUI? -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
That's how I usually use the console on the X4200. However, that arrangement doesn't work when one wants to (re)install Solaris. Unless there's a way of telling the installer to use the serial console while booting from DVD, rather than using the GUI? I thought there were a grub use ttya and use ttyb line on the DVD? Casper ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought there were a grub use ttya and use ttyb line on the DVD? Yes but one needs to be able to see that menu in order to select the correct item first. A chicken-and-egg situation! Not that it matters so much for this case now, as I've hooked up a spare monitor and keyboard to it. But connecting a monitor and keyboard directly to a server just feels ... wrong. But then I'm an old-school SPARC guy, so I guess that's not too surprising! :-) -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Yes but one needs to be able to see that menu in order to select the correct item first. A chicken-and-egg situation! But the console redirection setting in the BIOS should address that, right? Casper ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Jerry Jelinek wrote: Rich, Rich Teer wrote: Hi all, Last time I checked, having one's zone roots (zonepaths) on ZFS file systems was not a recommended practice, despite the fact that this works. IIRC, the problem was that the upgrade code didn't grok zfs and would therefore get terribly confused should the zone roots reside on ZFS. However, given that S10 11/06 doesn't support upgrading of zones anyway (even if they reside on UFS file systems), is this point moot? (Or is that applicable to live upgrade only?) This is incorrect. All S10 updates have supported upgrading systems with zones. I believe what you are thinking of is that live-upgrade does not support upgrading systems with zones. This is being fixed in the next S10 update. It is already fixed in nevada. Which Nevada build? More succinctly: apart from not being able to upgrade (presumably an initial reinstall will be required), what are the reasons for NOT hosting zone roots on ZFS? That is the only real reason. The only other reason I know of is fairly obscure. The patch tools don't know about zfs so they can miscalculate space when you have a set of zones, each on their own zfs dataset, but in the same zpool. If you were really tight on space, the patch process might fail partway through as a result. This is probably not an issue for most people but is the only other one I know of. When will zone roots on ZFS be supported by live upgrade? Jerry ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org Thanks! ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
John Clingan wrote: This is incorrect. All S10 updates have supported upgrading systems with zones. I believe what you are thinking of is that live-upgrade does not support upgrading systems with zones. This is being fixed in the next S10 update. It is already fixed in nevada. Which Nevada build? The install code changes look like they were integrated into b53. Some of the zones support that was needed had been integrated earlier. The bug is 6264796. When will zone roots on ZFS be supported by live upgrade? I don't know. Asking the install team would be your best bet. Jerry ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Do you know which nevada build that will be? Thanks! John Clingan Sun Microsystems Sent from mobile phone. -Original Message- From: Lori Alt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS? Date: Wed Feb 7, 2007 2:51 pm Size: 1K To: Jerry Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: ZFS discussion list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; John Clingan [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Zones discussion list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org Jerry Jelinek wrote: John Clingan wrote: This is incorrect. All S10 updates have supported upgrading systems with zones. I believe what you are thinking of is that live-upgrade does not support upgrading systems with zones. This is being fixed in the next S10 update. It is already fixed in nevada. Which Nevada build? The install code changes look like they were integrated into b53. Some of the zones support that was needed had been integrated earlier. The bug is 6264796. When will zone roots on ZFS be supported by live upgrade? I don't know. Asking the install team would be your best bet. Zone roots on ZFS will definitely be supported by liveupgrade at the time that zfs as a root file system is supported, currently planned for Update 5. There is a possibility that liveupgrade for zone roots on ZFS will be supported earlier than Update 5, if it can be released as a bug fix. Lori ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zones-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] Downsides to zone roots on ZFS?
Is this true for OpenSolaris? My experience: I was trying to upgrade from SunOS 5.11 snv_28 to SunOS 5.11 snv_54 where my NGZ zone roots were set to a zfs mount point like below: NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT zpool 93.8G 40.1G26K /zpool zpool/zones 3.50G 40.1G 1.68G /zpool/zones Upgrading to SNV_54 did not work for me (CD|DVD|Live-Upgrade). The install procedure was cancelled after it came to the NGZ ZFS setup part. However - I was enforced to to a full re-install of the whole OS. By this time, I decided to have an OS independent application setup: I decided to leave all my Non-Solaris apps within the following structure: NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT zpool 93.8G 40.1G26K /zpool zpool/applic2.40G 40.1G 2.40G /zpool/applic zpool/bin108M 40.1G 108M /zpool/bin zpool/data 644M 40.1G 644M /zpool/data zpool/logs 1.03G 40.1G 1.03G /zpool/logs This means, Apache, Tomcat, Bind DNS, Postfix, MySQL, Berkeley-DB, ... was installed using a prefix (e.g. ./configure --prefix=/zpool/applic/named) This gives me some independencies to the core OS located in /sbin; /usr/bin, ... After I moved all my apps into my own prefix path (ZFS mount poing), I did another full reinstall of the OS, where I found out that I should have backed up some files from the core OS before. Especially I should have backed up the following files from the GZ and all NGZ. a) /etc/hosts, /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/nsswitch.conf, /etc/resolv.conf b) /etc/hostname.XX, c) /etc/init.d/startup-scripts (my own releases) After I did another full setup (not upgrading), I created the zones using the famous zonemgr script and brought back all applications by just mounting the /zpool/applic/path into the NGZ path. This way, I was pretty fast in upgrading the whole system to a new Nevada build, even upgrading would be the preferred solution to me. I do not know if I with SNV_54, another upgrade from SNV_54 to SNV_55 is supported by OpenSolaris. That is why this thread is of interest to me. My 2 cents Ivan On Wednesday 07 February 2007 22:39, Rich Teer wrote: On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Jerry Jelinek wrote: This is incorrect. All S10 updates have supported upgrading systems with zones. I believe what you are thinking of is that live-upgrade does not support upgrading systems with zones. This is being fixed in the next S10 update. It is already fixed in nevada. Gotcha; thanks for the clarification. That is the only real reason. The only other reason I know of is fairly obscure. The patch tools don't know about zfs so they can miscalculate space when you have a set of zones, each on their own zfs dataset, but in the same zpool. If you were really tight on space, the patch process might fail partway through as a result. This is probably not an issue for most people but is the only other one I know of. Excellent; disk space won't be an issue for me, nor will the non-live-upgradability, so I'll be putting my zone roots on ZFS. Much obliged! ___ zones-discuss mailing list zones-discuss@opensolaris.org
