Mike Dotson wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 14:29 -0600, Lori Alt wrote:
Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
IMHO, there should be no need to put any ZFS filesystems in /etc/vfstab,
but (this is something of a digression based on discussion kicked up by
PSARC 2007/297) it's become clear to me that ZFS filesystems *should* be
mounted by mountall and mount -a rather than via a special-case
invocation of "zfs mount" at the end of the fs-local method script.
in other words: teach "mount" how to find the list of filesystems in
attached pools and mix them in to the dependency graph it builds to
mount filesystems in the right order, rather than mounting
everything-but-zfs first and then zfs later.
I agree with this. This seems like a necessary response to
both PSARC/2007/297 and also necessary for eliminating
legacy mounts for zfs root file systems. The problem of
the interaction between legacy and non-legacy mounts will just
get worse once we are using non-legacy mounts for the
file systems in the BE.
Could we also look into why system-console insists on waiting for ALL
the zfs mounts to be available? Shouldn't the main file system food
groups be mounted and then allow console-login (much like single user or
safe-mode)?
Would help in many cases where an admin needs to work on a system but
doesn't need, say 20k users home directories mounted, to do this work.
So single-user mode is not sufficient for this?
Lori
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
