From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 24 09:12:38 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F43C9B for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:12:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from borjam@sarenet.es) Received: from proxypop03b.sare.net (proxypop03b.sare.net [194.30.0.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABA4108 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:12:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.16.2.2] (izaro.sarenet.es [192.148.167.11]) by proxypop03.sare.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 33E3C9E084E; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:12:08 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: RFC: Suggesting ZFS "best practices" in FreeBSD Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Borja Marcos In-Reply-To: <565CB55B-9A75-47F4-A88B-18FA8556E6A2@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:12:29 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <19EED306-9AA8-4DFE-8164-331C1DAD28CC@sarenet.es> References: <314B600D-E8E6-4300-B60F-33D5FA5A39CF@sarenet.es> <565CB55B-9A75-47F4-A88B-18FA8556E6A2@samsco.org> To: Scott Long X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: FreeBSD Filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:12:38 -0000 On Jan 22, 2013, at 3:33 PM, Scott Long wrote: > Look up SCSI device wiring in /sys/conf/NOTES. That's one solution to = static naming, just with a slightly different angle than Solaris. I do = agree with your general thesis here, and either wiring should be made a = much more visible and documented feature, or a new mechanism should be = developed to provide naming stability. Please let me know what you = think of the wiring mechanic. The mechanism used in Solaris has, in my opinion, two benefits: it is = used by default, which is important. It means less troublesome = installations, less time bombs lurking. The second important benefit is that, especially with many disks, it's = easier (at least for me) to think in terms of controllers and disks, = rather than "disk number 47". But well, it can be different for many = people. Of course, a big advantage for Solaris was Sun hardware at least in the = golden years, where everything was well predictable. PCs are chaos, and = Intel based servers have inherited the worst of the PC chaos.=20 But a good mechanism, and, I think, working by default, is badly needed. = And I would advocate for a more "Solaris-like" approach. Borja.