Thanks for the note and discussion jerry...
I'm not a huge fan of LU (historical bagage on my part I guess) I recently
started seeing its use as a some sort of means to an end.
The interesting thing is that what you're proposing here (which is much more of
an "patch-upgrade" than an "upgrade-update", appears to remove the "can't have
your zone-root on zfs" limitation. (You mentioned in a previous note that this
is how you were testing things)
So while this method won't help with "actual os upgrades" the ability to use
zfs to assist with offline patching, migration to newer-patched servers, and
zfs-snap/clone based backouts is ubelievably HUGE. Anyone who is rolling zones
in prod will happily attest to that I think. Please let us know if you need any
customer support to adjust any priorities etc surrounding this project.
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ellis, Mike
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>; email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tue Jun 05 08:44:08 2007
Subject: Re: [zones-discuss] updating a zone when attaching
Ellis, Mike wrote:
> I like your eaxample... Good way to go if you can't swing the zones over to
> some other server for import/attach/upgrade.
> How would you envision backing out of the newbe environment if (after doing
> the zoneimport +upgrade) you decide you want to back out and boot to the
> pre-lu root-environment?
I am not proposing an integrated backout as part of this. Just as with
a standard upgrade, you can't backout. However, with zone migration
you have all sorts of tools if you want to backout. You can clone the
zone before detaching, you can keep a copy of the zone on the original
system or if you used an archive file to migrate the zone, you can keep
a copy of that. That is also why I am proposing an option you would need
to specify for the update, so that we don't modify the zone until you
> (You can't attach -u the luns for downgrade purposes can you? The zones would
> be seriously out of whack as a result of the attach/upgrade.)
I won't allow a downgrade.
> I guess if there WAS zfs in play, at least you could snapshot before
Even without zfs you can clone the zone. It just takes longer.
> The whole attach+upgrade thing is a little scary anyway, some sort of backout
> will be needed...
See my comments above.
> Maybe put the zones in some lu-state before doing the attach+upgrade? Maybe
> that's the suggested way to do this anyay? (Lu the whole shabang, which will
> give you clean backout of zones and root-env)
LU is not an alternative here since it works on all of the zones along with
the global zone, not a single new zone that we are trying to attach. It
is a good solution for handling the whole system but is not a solution
for attaching a single zone. While I haven't gotten into the implementation
details in this proposal, the way LU works is fundamentally different than
what I am proposing here.
> As mike said, we're going to have zfs play in this space sooner or later, and
> its snapshot facilities can really help solve some serious issues here.
> Interesting development... Attach+upgrade zones is flirting with "killer-app"
> status, especially when combined with zfs clones/snapshots.
zones-discuss mailing list