Mike Gerdts wrote:
> I have three (hopefully) quick questions:
> - Are there any current (S10) or future incompatibilities with zone roots on
>   iscsi?

No.  Block storage is block storage.

> - Are there any current (S10) or future incompatibilities with zone roots on
>   SVM disk sets?


> - Are there any current (Nevada) or future incompatibilities with
>   having one zfs pool per zone?  Zone cloning with zfs clones will be
>   broken - anything else?

No, not at all.  You simply move the cloning process into the storage 
layer... instead of cloning a ZFS dataset you clone the entire LUN.

> And here's why I ask...
> I'm working on some improvements to my existing zone configuration and
> management methodology.  As much as possible I am looking to have the
> improvements be future looking enough that as future improvements come
> about I have to do the minimal rework.
> My understanding is that:
> - Today each zonepath must exist on a UFS (or VxFS or possibly QFS)
>   file system.  Read another way, ZFS is not supported for zones
>   today.  The key reason for this is the lack of support for upgrade
>   and sporadic support for patching of zones on ZFS.
If you require package consistency, the this is true.  If you by-pass 
the configuration tools ZFS works.

> - In the next release of Solaris, zones will have to be on ZFS due to
>   expected changes in packaging, patching, and installation.

I am aware of no such change.
> - There will be a transition period between "zfs not supported" and
>   "zfs required" that will likely start with the release of S10U6.

Same here, I'm not aware of this change and would by highly skeptical.  
Nevada hasn't taken this turn, and again, even if it did that would be 
imposed simply by the configuration tools and easy to bypass.

zones-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to