Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:16:40 -0600 From: CyberLeo Kitsana <cyberleo@cyberleo.net> To: lists@midsummerdream.org Cc: ryallsd@gmail.com, perryh@pluto.rain.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AHCI driver and static device names Message-ID: <4EE94A78.1030506@cyberleo.net> In-Reply-To: <4EE91308.8050300@midsummerdream.org> References: <4ED98E9F.9010401@midsummerdream.org> <CAN3mi_2u%2BHwFf3m%2BxvsNncfNpj_rFp94xjAv%2Bf0eFT7c4a%2B8Tg@mail.gmail.com> <4EDA489B.9060503@midsummerdream.org> <4EDA56A3.6090108@cyberleo.net> <4edb4b48.LvOhZvvsP1inJeps%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4EE91308.8050300@midsummerdream.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/14/2011 03:20 PM, Rob wrote: > Can glabels, gpt, and zfs all work together? I have a system where I > have disks with 4 gpt partitions. Partitions 2 and 3 are part of gmirror > arrays, and partition 4 is part of a zfs pool. glabel says it writes to > the end of the partition, which I believe zfs also writes to doesn't it? Yup. However, all nestable geoms protect their metadata (when it exists) by providing a device that is smaller, so any nested consumer never even sees the provider's metadata. The end of the glabel device to which zfs writes its metadata in your implied example is actually several sectors prior to the end of the device or partition to which glabel writes its metadata. Explicit glabels are not strictly necessary with the GPT partitioning scheme, since the glabel module can peek into the GPT data structure, extract label names from there, and automatically create appropriate /dev/gpt/ entries for those labels. -- Fuzzy love, -CyberLeo Technical Administrator CyberLeo.Net Webhosting http://www.CyberLeo.Net <CyberLeo@CyberLeo.Net> Furry Peace! - http://wwww.fur.com/peace/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EE94A78.1030506>