zone update on attach all [PSARC/2010/082 Self Review]

On 03/10/10 03:50, Zoram Thanga wrote: > Hi Jerry, > > May I request that a possible impact on the "cluster" brand be > evaluated? As you know, the "cluster" brand has the same packaging > characteristics as that of the native brand. I would just like to make > sure that your changes do not cause u

prctl usage output [PSARC/2009/392 FastTrack timeout 07/20/2009]

This case has timed out with no objections. I have marked it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

labeled brand zone [PSARC/2009/065 FastTrack timeout 02/11/2009]

This case was approved at todays PSARC meeting. Both managers have signed the contract so I marked the case closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

max-processes rctl [PSARC/2009/042 FastTrack timeout 01/28/2009]

This fast-track timed out with no objections so I have marked it closed approved. I placed an updated spec in the case directory which includes the additional task rctls added during the discussion of this case. Thanks, Jerry

Identifying special patches [PSARC/2009/012 FastTrack timeout 01/16/2009]

This case timed out last Friday with no objections. I marked it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

Identifying special patches [PSARC/2009/012 FastTrack timeout 01/16/2009]

During the email discussion for this case last week it was discovered that Fujitsu has issued their patches in the 9x range that we were originally proposing for special patches. We have exchanged email off-line with Fujitsu and they are only using the 9x range for their patches. They pla

Identifying special patches [PSARC/2009/012 FastTrack timeout 01/16/2009]

Jonathan O'Brien wrote: > > Gerald Jelinek wrote: >> >> EXPORTED INTERFACES >> >> Patch ID range 9xCommitted >> reserved for special patches >> > > Fujitsu has been known to release patches with IDs in > the range of 9x. I don't think they ever asked > anyone if they c

Identifying special patches [PSARC/2009/012 FastTrack timeout 01/16/2009]

Garrett D'Amore wrote: > I think it doesn't qualify for automatic approval. I suspect the > special numbering will be the cause of some consternation. I'm not sure > what number we're up to on our patching, but when will we run into the > problem where our patch numbers don't work? Patch IDs

native zones p2v [PSARC/2008/766 FastTrack timeout 12/18/2008]

This fast-track timed out with no objections, so I am marking it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

native zones p2v [PSARC/2008/766 FastTrack timeout 12/18/2008]

Darren J Moffat wrote: > I'm happy with that explanation. I think what is "wrong" here is the > split between zonecfg and installation is a little at odds with a p2v > conversion. However I don't think this case should attempt to address > any of that. > > The case can go forward as specified

native zones p2v [PSARC/2008/766 FastTrack timeout 12/18/2008]

Darren J Moffat wrote: > Jerry Jelinek wrote: >> Darren J Moffat wrote: >>> What happens with the hostid on x86 ? when a p2v is done ? Does the >>> hostid of the created zone match the hostid of the original host ? >> >> Darren, >> >> No, b

native zones p2v [PSARC/2008/766 FastTrack timeout 12/18/2008]

Darren J Moffat wrote: > What happens with the hostid on x86 ? when a p2v is done ? Does the > hostid of the created zone match the hostid of the original host ? Darren, No, by default a zone's hostid is the same as the global zones hostid, unless the zone is configured to use a different hosti

"Cluster" Brand Zone Interfaces [PSARC/2008/747 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2008]

This fast-track has time out with no objections. The contract was signed by both managers, so I am marking it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

"Cluster" Brand Zone Interfaces [PSARC/2008/747 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2008]

James Carlson wrote: > Gerald Jelinek writes: >> I am sponsoring this fast-track (which only records a >> contract) for Ellard Roush. A copy of the contract >> is in the case directory and both managers will approve >> the contract before the timeout. > > The fast track materials (the email messa

Cross-Platform DDI Interface for Converting Strings to 64-bit Integers [PSARC/2008/740 FastTrack timeout 12/09/2008]

This case timed out with no objections. I am marking it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

"Cluster" Brand Zone Interfaces [PSARC/2008/747 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2008]

An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Sridhar Yedunuthula Subject: Re: PSARC contract Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:25:16 -0800 Size: 2173 URL:

Configurable Hostids for Non-Global Zones [PSARC/2008/647 FastTrack timeout 10/30/2008]

This fast-track timed out last week. Jordan addressed everyone's questions and there were no objections, so I am marking this closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

core files should contain symtab sections [PSARC/2008/491 FastTrack timeout 08/07/2008]

This case was approved at todays PSARC meeting. I have marked it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

zoneadm attach -b option [PSARC/2008/410 FastTrack timeout 07/07/2008]

This fast-track timed out yesterday with no objections, so I am marking it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

zoneadm attach -b option [PSARC/2008/410 FastTrack timeout 07/07/2008]

Darren, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Gerald Jelinek wrote: >> # zoneadm -z myzone attach -u -b IDR246802-01 -b 123456-08 >> >> This new option is brand-specific and only applies to zone brands >> using >> SVr4 packaging. > > Given the above I think "-b" is too generic an option name, par

zone update on attach [PSARC/2007/621 FastTrack timeout 10/05/2007]

This fast-track has timed out with no comments and the contract has been approved by both managers so I am marking it closed approved. Thanks, Jerry

zone update on attach [PSARC/2007/621 FastTrack timeout 10/05/2007]

[Sorry for any duplicates, resending to psarc-ext] I am sponsoring this fast-track for myself. There is a contract associated with this case and I have placed a copy in the case directory. I will have the appropriate managers email the case with their approval. Thanks, Jerry --- SUMMARY:

PSARC/2004/402 CPU caps

James Carlson wrote: > OK; I think I see it now. If someone sets the rctl to a value that > doesn't "map" into the simplified property, then he won't be able to > use the simplified version. > > They are _not_ different things. They're just user-syntactic bits > over top of a single (rctl) mecha

PSARC/2004/402 CPU caps

I would like to respond to the following question since the zones team worked with Sasha on this part of his proposal. James Carson wrote: > I'm confused by 'rctl zone.cpu-cap' versus 'capped-cpu ncpus' in > zonecfg. > > They appear to be specifying the same thing. Why would an > administrator n