Hi Mary,

On 03/25/09 18:38, mary ding wrote:
> Ethan and William:
>
> I agree with Ethan about this.  We shouldn't require user to do 
> anything manual or customize manifest to workaround this ugly zfs bug.
>
> So far, this is what I found out for sparc and x86.  I hit this bug 
> everytime when my system had more than 700 MB for sparc and x86.  With 
> 512 MB, the install works but it is very slow.
>
> With system that had 1 GB of memory, if I delete zfs swap, IPS install 
> will fail and run out of memory.

Do you happen to know if the behavior is the same
for sparc & x86 systems with 1GB of memory ?

I am asking, since after fix for 4166 bug was integrated,
AI is supposed to work on x86 systems with 1GB of memory
without swap device. If it fails for you, might I please
take a look at x86 machine in question ?

Thank you,
Jan

>
> If I do this on system with 2 GB of memory and delete zfs swap, the 
> install works.
>
> If you need any help testing the workaround, I will be happy to try 
> them out since I had machines available for testing purpose.
>
>
>
>
>
> Ethan Quach wrote:
>>
>>
>> William Schumann wrote:
>>> RE: Bugzilla bug 6084 AI fails due to solaris.zlib becoming corrupt 
>>> during install
>>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=6804
>>>
>>> 6817316 data corruption seen with swapping to a zvol
>>> http://monaco.sfbay/detail.jsf?cr=6817316
>>>
>>> The problem occurs when a ZFS volume is used for swap in the 
>>> Automated Installer.  There is an alternative swap solution - to use 
>>> a slice for swap instead of a ZFS volume.
>>>
>>> Currently, AI follows the logic of creating swap on a ZFS volume if 
>>> there is enough space.  If not, the target partition (x86) or disk 
>>> (SPARC) slice 1 will be used for swap if there is enough space.
>>>
>>> What I propose here to add a feature: a new AI manifest element 
>>> <target_device_swap_slice_number>, which would force the creation of 
>>> swap on an indicated slice instead of on a ZFS volume.
>>
>> This is a workaround, but this solution would seem to require that
>> the user manually do something to work around the issue after hitting
>> it.  Could we devise a work around that works out of the box?  Or at
>> least works out of the box for most scenarios?
>>
>> For example, for systems with XX Gb memory, we could still create the
>> swap zvol, and just not add it during the microroot.  I think Mary's
>> found that XX so far equals 2Gb, but she doesn't really have any
>> systems with anything between 1Gb and 2Gb of memory.  With some VBox
>> testing perhaps we can find that number to be something smaller, and
>> then our bug case would only be for systems with memory between
>> 700Mb and XXGb --and only there would we institute some really
>> ugly hack.  For those cases we could resort to what you've described
>> above, or just move our 700Mb number up to XXGb.
>>
>>
>> thanks,
>> -ethan
>>
>>>
>>> An advantage of this approach is that, since we are as yet uncertain 
>>> of which configurations will exhibit bug 6084, there is a simple 
>>> manual configuration change to work around it.  It would also serve 
>>> as an AI feature (although perhaps not a terribly interesting one).
>>>
>>> I would estimate a day of work to code this and do unit testing.  
>>> The additional risk would be small.
>>>
>>> I will mention here that the swapping to a zvol bug needs to be 
>>> fixed, and that perhaps we shouldn't be thinking in terms of a 
>>> workaround, but a high priority fix.
>>>
>>> Any feedback would be appreciated,
>>> William
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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