ZFS boot is one of the best usage of ZFS for me. I can create more then 10 boot environment, rollback or destroy if necessary. Not afraid of bfu anymore or patching or any other software installation. If bfu breaks the OS, just rollback as simple as that.
Rgds, Andre W. Kugutsumen wrote: > Thanks, this is really strange. > In your particular case you have /usr on the same pool as your rootfs > and I guess that's why it is working for you. > > Alll my attempts with b64, b70 and b73 failed if /usr is on a separate > pool. > > > On 05/10/2007, at 4:10 PM, Andre Wenas wrote: > >> Hi Kugutsumen, >> >> Not sure abt the bugs, I follow instruction at >> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/zfsboot-manual >> and create separate /usr, /opt and /var filesystem. >> >> Here is the vfstab: >> #device device mount FS fsck >> mount mount >> #to mount to fsck point type pass at >> boot options >> # >> fd - /dev/fd fd - no - >> /proc - /proc proc - no - >> /dev/dsk/c0d0s1 - - swap - no - >> /devices - /devices devfs - no - >> sharefs - /etc/dfs/sharetab sharefs - no - >> ctfs - /system/contract ctfs - no - >> objfs - /system/object objfs - no - >> swap - /tmp tmpfs - yes - >> /dev/dsk/c0d0p0:1 /dev/rdsk/c0d0p0:1 /windows/C >> pcfs 2 yes >> - >> /dev/dsk/c0d0p0:2 /dev/rdsk/c0d0p0:2 /windows/D >> pcfs 2 yes >> - >> /dev/dsk/c0d0p0:3 /dev/rdsk/c0d0p0:3 /windows/E >> pcfs 2 yes >> - >> rootpool/rootfs - / zfs - no - >> rootpool/rootfs/usr - /usr zfs - no - >> rootpool/rootfs/var - /var zfs - no - >> rootpool/rootfs/opt - /opt zfs - yes - >> >> The reason why I separate /usr, /opt, /var because I want to compress >> them: >> bash-3.00$ zfs get compressratio rootpool/rootfs/usr >> NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE >> rootpool/rootfs/usr compressratio 1.65x - >> bash-3.00$ zfs get compressratio rootpool/rootfs/var >> NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE >> rootpool/rootfs/var compressratio 2.10x - >> bash-3.00$ zfs get compressratio rootpool/rootfs/opt >> NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE >> rootpool/rootfs/opt compressratio 1.66x >> >> My entire bootdisk only need 2.5GB (entire distribution): >> bash-3.00$ zfs list rootpool/rootfs >> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >> rootpool/rootfs 2.58G 1.85G 351M legacy >> >> To be able to rollback you need to create another boot environment >> using snapshot and clone. I named the new zfs root filesystem as >> rootpool/tx (planned to install Solaris trusted extension on the new >> boot environment). >> >> bash-3.00$ zfs list -r rootpool/tx >> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >> rootpool/tx 57.2M 1.85G 343M legacy >> rootpool/tx/opt 30K 1.85G 230M legacy >> rootpool/tx/usr 198K 1.85G 1.79G legacy >> rootpool/tx/var 644K 1.85G 68.1M legacy >> >> If you want to rollback you need to boot to the clone BE then rollback. >> >> Rgds, >> Andre W. >> >> Kugutsumen wrote: >>> Please do share how you managed to have a separate ZFS /usr since >>> b64; there are dependencies to /usr and they are not documented. -kv >>> doesn't help too. I tried added /usr/lib/libdisk* to a /usr/lib dir >>> on the root partition and failed. Jurgen also pointed that there are >>> two related bugs already filed: Bug ID 6570056 Synopsis /sbin/zpool >>> should not link to files in /usr/lib >>> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6570056 >>> Bug ID 6494840 Synopsis libzfs should dlopen libiscsitgt rather than >>> linking to it >>> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6494840 I >>> can do a snapshot on bootroot too ... after I tried to do a rollback >>> from failsafe I couldn't boot anymore, probably because there was no >>> straightforward way to rebuild the boot archive. Regarding >>> compression, if I am not mistaken, grub cannot access files that are >>> compressed. Regards, K. On 05/10/2007, at 5:55 AM, Andre Wenas wrote: >>>> Hi, Using bootroot I can do seperate /usr filesystem since b64. I >>>> can also do snapshot, clone and compression. Rgds, Andre W. >>>> Kugutsumen wrote: >>>>> Lori Alt told me that mountrount was a temporary hack until grub >>>>> could boot zfs natively. Since build 62, mountroot support was >>>>> dropped and I am not convinced that this is a mistake. Let's >>>>> compare the two: Mountroot: Pros: * can have root partition on >>>>> raid-z: YES * can have root partition on zfs stripping mirror: YES >>>>> * can have usr partition on separate ZFS partition with build < 72 >>>>> : YES * can snapshot and rollback root partition: YES * can use >>>>> copies on root partition on a single root disk (e.g. a laptop ): >>>>> YES * can use compression on root partition: YES Cons: * grub >>>>> native support: NO (if you use raid-z or stripping mirror, you >>>>> will need to have a small UFS partition to bootstrap the system, >>>>> but you can use a small usb stick for that purpose.) New and >>>>> "improved" *sigh* bootroot scheme: Pros: * grub native support: >>>>> YES Cons: * can have root partition on raid-z: NO * can have root >>>>> partition on zfs stripping mirror: NO * can use copies on root >>>>> partition on a single root disk (e.g. a laptop ): NO * can have >>>>> usr partition on separate ZFS partition with build < 72 : NO * can >>>>> snapshot and rollback root partition: NO * can use compression on >>>>> root partition: NO * No backward compatibility with zfs mountroot. >>>>> Why did we completely drop support for the old mountroot approach >>>>> which is so much more flexible? Kugutsumen >>>>> _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss >>>>> mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >>> _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing >>> list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
