> Snapshots are not on a per-pool basis but a > per-file-system basis. Thus, when you took a > snapshot of "testpol", you didn't actually snapshot > the pool; rather, you took a snapshot of the top > level file system (which has an implicit name > matching that of the pool). > > Thus, you haven't actually affected file systems fs1 > or fs2 at all. > > However, apparently you were able to roll back the > file system, which either unmounted or broke the > mounts to fs1 and fs2. This probably shouldn't have > been allowed. (I wonder what would happen with an > explicit non-ZFS mount to a ZFS directory which is > removed by a rollback?)
Yes the feature to take snapshots directly on pool must not be allowed. > Your fs1 and fs2 file systems still exist, but > they're not attached to their old names any more. > Maybe they got unmounted. You could probably mount > them, either on the fs1 directory and on a new fs2 > directory if you create one, or at a different point > in your file system hierarchy. > You are right, they got unmounted. zfs get mounted testpol/fs1 ---------> says no zfs get mounted testpol/fs2 ---------> says no I understand that mounted attribute is a read only property of a zfs file system. I tried to mount the fs1 and fs2, but i was unsuccessful in doing so. Is there any specific way to mount zfs file systems? I have observed another strange behavior, in the same way as discussed in my previous post, i created the pool structure. When i roll back the snapshot for the first time, everything seems to be working perfectly. I could see that file systems fs1 and fs2 are not affected. However when i roll back the snapshot for the second time the file systems are unmounted. Any ideas? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
