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. >
I'm not surprised that having /usr in a separate pool failed. The design of zfs boot largely assumes that root, /usr, and /var are all on the same pool, and it is unlikely that we would do the work to support any other configuration any time soon. Lori > > >> 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 > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
