From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 9 21:33:01 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0E6106564A; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 21:33:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from asmtpout026.mac.com (asmtpout026.mac.com [17.148.16.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E058FC14; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 21:33:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from macbook-pro.jnpr.net (natint3.juniper.net [66.129.224.36]) by asmtp026.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.01 (built Dec 16 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KMJ00I55AIZ4B00@asmtp026.mac.com>; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:33:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Marcel Moolenaar In-reply-to: <20090709200102.GA2438@garage.freebsd.pl> Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:32:59 -0700 Message-id: References: <20090709200102.GA2438@garage.freebsd.pl> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1068) Cc: Ivan Voras , freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: glabel and real disk IDs X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:33:01 -0000 On Jul 9, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > >> 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 > 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. Just as an FYI: I see ZFS getting confused when disks are shuffled around. The confusion is the result of having device paths stored in the ZFS label match the device name of some other vdev that part of the same pool. Replacing a device with itself doesn't help, because ZFS complains that the vdev is part of an active pool in that case. It seems that only labels will work here... -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com