Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:41:13 +0200
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es>
Cc:        FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org>, Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
Subject:   Re: RFC: Suggesting ZFS "best practices" in FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <50FE96F9.6000900@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <314B600D-E8E6-4300-B60F-33D5FA5A39CF@sarenet.es>
References:  <314B600D-E8E6-4300-B60F-33D5FA5A39CF@sarenet.es>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 22/01/2013 13:03 Borja Marcos said the following:
> pool/root pool/root/var pool/root/usr pool/root/tmp
> 
> Why pool/root instead of simply "pool"? Because it's easier to understand,
> snapshot, send/receive, etc. Why in a hierarchy? Because, if needed, it's
> possible to snapshot the whole "system" tree atomically.

I recommend placing "/" into pool/ROOT/<current-name>.
That would very useful for boot environments (BEs - use them!).

> I also set the mountpoint of the "system" tree as legacy, and rely on
> /etc/fstab.

I do place anything for ZFS into fstab.
Nor I use vfs.root.mountfrom loader variable.
I depend on the boot and kernel code doing the right thing based on pool's bootfs
property.

> Why? In order to avoid an accidental "auto mount"  of critical
> filesystems in case, for example, I boot off a pendrive in order to tinker.

Not sure what you mean, if you don't import the pool nothing gets mounted.
If you remember to use import -R then everything gets mounted in controlled places.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50FE96F9.6000900>