Dave Miner wrote:
> Jean McCormack wrote:
>> Dave Miner wrote:
>>> Sundar Yamunachari wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>   The update to the the design document for the AI spring release 
>>>> based on comments, feedback and design considerations is at 
>>>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/auto_install/Design_doc_delta_for_AI_Spring_2009.1.pdf.
>>>>  
>>>> This can be also accessed from the Caiman documentation page at 
>>>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/auto_install/Documentation. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> 1.1 The service dependency descriptions here have been superceded, I 
>>> believe, by the results of discussion around jean's design note from 
>>> last week.
>>
>> What we have is:
>> svc:/network/dns/multicast:default   optional  restart_on restart
>> svc:/network/tftp/udp6:default         optional   restart_on none
>> svc:/network/http:apache22             required  restart_on none
>>
>>>
>>> I have concerns about the service configuration file proposed here.  
>>> Was storing these in SMF property groups considered?  The data seems 
>>> compatible with doing so.  One of the points of SMF was to reduce the 
>>> need for lots of configuration file formats, each with their own 
>>> custom parsers.  Are there other factors arguing against use of the 
>>> SMF repository?
>> Dave,
>>
>> The issue around using the SMF property groups, I believe, is the 
>> scalability factor. To do this we  need to have a list of n sets of 
>> properties one for each possible install service. In our discussion 
>> last week you mentioned that SMF properties didn't scale very well.
>>
> 
> I think the concern around scaling is in placing lots of data as lists 
> into single properties.
> 
>> Or are you talking about starting up a new smf service for each 
>> install service? In that case the property groups would work very well.
>>

This decision still needs to be worked out.  We're not certain yet
which way we're going to go with this.

> 
> A new service per group could be a choice, I guess.  

> Alternatively you 
> might create a new property group  associated with the 
> system/install/server installation service, with its name based on the 
> install service name.

Dynamically creating new, arbitrarily named property groups for an
SMF service?  Is this really done by any other SMF services or even
recommended?


-ethan

> 
> Dave
> 
>> Jean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Dave
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> caiman-discuss mailing list
>>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> caiman-discuss mailing list
>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss

Reply via email to