On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Kaspar Schiess <e...@space.ch> wrote: > Creating zpools is a manual thing in every case, since one has to know the > devices participating. The names of which tend to be a little bit different > from one server to the next.
Wow, so I've got a fairly large Solaris 10 server deployment and I've never used the zpool type out of F.U.D. I've often thought I should, but at the same time thought I'd have to dig into the source to see what it'd actually do. So I'm surprised by the result, could you describe the situation a bit more? Every time I've used the zpool create command on a block device that was/is a member of a zpool the command complains loudly that this is a potentially dangerous and destructive operation. If I'm sure I then force the operation with zpool create -f Does the zpool type just blindly force creation and ignore these warning? In addition, I totally agree about the complexities surrounding zpool creation. I run with MPxIO and the device path names change when the system first boots after MPxIO is activated. With the complexity of dealing with two device paths before puppet configures MPxIO and one totally new name after MPxIO, I've just always dealt with it semi-manually with some helper scripts that look at format</dev/null "before and after" outputs, comparing them to determine the actual path I'm interested in. So I don't think this is an intractable problem, I think the type just needs to be smarter and follow the expectations people have about zpool create versus zpool create -f Is anyone interested in diving into it a bit more with me? -Jeff -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
