On 05/24/12 04:28, Matt Keenan wrote:
Ethan,
Comments below.
On 05/23/12 20:59, Ethan Quach wrote:
On 05/23/12 01:55, Matt Keenan wrote:
Ethan,
Thanks for the review.
On 05/22/12 21:17, Ethan Quach wrote:
Hi Matt,
172 - Question: Is it indeed required that /var/share live in the
root pool?
As var share is specified to be "in_be", and a BE can only reside on
the root pool then yes it has to be on the root pool.
I think you misstated that, the /var/share filesystem (i.e. VARSHARE)
is not in_be.
Let me restate the question, would this be a valid configuration?
rpool/ROOT/solaris /
rpool/ROOT/soalris/var /var
....
foopool/export /export
foopool/export/home /export/home
foopool/VARSHARE /var/share
Or is the /var/share filesystem actually required to be in the same
pool as the root pool for some reason? (I just want to make sure
we're not enforcing something that isn't required.)
Sorry read your original comment a little fast. 27 C(80 F) heat in the
office must be effecting my vision.
To be honest I don't know, I'm going to get clarification from ZFS
team and if it's not a requirement I'll ensure we don't enforce it.
The ZFS team had nothing to do with this feature so it's not them you
should ask.
You should always first consult the ARC case, as that is supposed to be
definitive. In this case (2012/066) the materials specify that it is
within the root pool, and filesystem(5) describes it as "...beneath the
zpool containing boot environments". We have little interest in
allowing boot environments to be split across pools and would need
substantial business justification for allowing it.
Dave
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
