On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 01:41:32PM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote: > > Certainly, many of us will be satisfied with all-in-one pool, > > just as we are today with all all-in-one filesystem, so this > > makes sense as a first step. But, there needs to be the > > presumption that the next steps towards multiple pool support > > are possible without having to re-architect or re-design the > > whole zfs boot system. > > I'm curious as to why you think this (note: I've nothing to do with ZFS > development). I understand the need for separate / and /usr in some > cases, but how does separate / and /usr add value in a ZFS bootroot > environment? Is it because one might like to have a very tiny pool > (e.g., on a USB flashdrive) to contain / and a larger one to contain > /usr? > > Thinking of ZFS crypto, it might, since one might put / in cleartext on > a small capacity USB flashdrive, say and keep everything else encrypted. > But one should want ZFS crypto to protect / as well as everything else > (/usr and homedirs), and I would hope that when ZFS crypto gets around > to meeting ZFS bootroot then we'll able to do just that.
I wonder how much this would change if a functional "pivot-root" mechanism were available. It be handy nice to boot from flash, import a pool, then make that the running root. Does anyone know if that's a target of any OpenSolaris projects? -- Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Technical Consultant TAOS http://www.taos.com/ Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area < This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
