Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 23:33:44 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: glabel and real disk IDs Message-ID: <9bbcef730907091433i6417de15o1462750b90fe54a@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090709200102.GA2438@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <h34lml$6fv$1@ger.gmane.org> <20090709200102.GA2438@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I really am not doing the things I do to agitate you personally. We can debate on technical grounds and I will back down if sufficient technical or logical reasons are given. I will not reply to any part of your messages that seem too emotional. 2009/7/9 Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>: > One of the reasons was polution of /dev/, The pollution of the /dev namespace could have been lessened by using a different policy in naming devices, as was suggested before (by me and others). The situation now is that we have passed the point of no return when glabel as-is arrived in the GENERIC kernel. Putting a freeze on adding new label parsers to glabel will not change anything for the better and will not fix existing problems. > another one was that the way > of getting SCSI disks IDs was not perfect. On the other hand, ATA IDs seem ok. If there are problems I don't see with them, I'd like to find out about them, better sooner than later. >> The purpose of this would be to have a unique disk ID without explicitly >> setting a label (e.g. as is commonly advised for ZFS and drive swapping). > > I guess you advice that? There is no such need when it comes to ZFS. ZFS I am not involved in ZFS development enough to advise or disadvise anything, except that I notice that there apparently is a problem somewhere in that area and that using glabel to fixate disk names is a common advice given to those who encounter it. The most recent thread (and the direct cause of my post) is http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.stable/63970 . I remember there are other similar threads. > can find his components just fine without using their names. Disk IDs > were added for ZFS in the past, but now they serve no purpose, I'd > prefer to remove them altogether or just leave them for informational > purpose as they exist now. I have seen your commit and was surprised by it. Doesn't it mean that because of it ZFS will not automatically pick up renumbered/renamed drives? Was the reason of removing disk id usage from ZFS that it didn't work? Can you suggest a solution (or a better solution than manually labeling drives) to the "drives renumbered" problem in the above thread? Finally, I will do what I proposed except if a) there is a noticeable community or developer outcry not to do it, for whatever reason or b) strong technical reasons are presented from anyone that would make the proposal invalid, unsecure, problematic to maintain, problematic to use for general users or others. Please also note that glabel is optional and noone is forcing anyone to use it. If you have problems with others' modifications to glabel, I also respectfully propose to take maintainance of it.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730907091433i6417de15o1462750b90fe54a>