Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:33:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: wilko@freebsd.org Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How much do we need the all-singing, all-dancing devfs? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10007280630440.60544-100000@beppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <20000728110827.A3470@freebie.demon.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > No- I want to map a *device*- I don't *particularly* care what it's name is
> > (the thing put in /etc/fstab or handed to 'mt')- but I do not necessarily want
> > to have to write to it (for a label) to address it. I can guarantee that the
>
> After all this is not NT ('it is harmless to write a signature').
No, no, no. Some folks are serious about you can't do this in their SAN. Also,
what about read-only devices?
>
> > address won't shift while the system is running.
>
> Can you? Assuming a LIP on a FC-AL that is setup for soft addressing and
> where devices come/go.
Look at isp_pdb_sync in isp.c, around line ~1609- I mean that I can guarantee
that with respect to the system, while it is running, the 'target' won't
change. The loopids can wander all over the map...
>
> > The other aspect of this is that these are unique names. This makes High
> > Availability device management a *snap*. It's WWNXXXXX on all systems on the
> > same fabric.
>
> Yep.. and that is what you really want.
-matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.10007280630440.60544-100000>