On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Neal Pollack <neal.poll...@sun.com> wrote:
> On 03/18/09 10:43 AM, Tim wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Tim wrote: >> >>> >>> Just an observation, but it sort of defeats the purpose of buying sun >>> hardware with sun software if you can't even get a "this is how your drives >>> will map" out of the deal... >>> >> >> Sun could fix that, but would you really want a replacement for BIOS? >> -- richard >> >> > Yes, I really would. I also have a hard time believing BIOS is the issue. > I have a 7110 sitting directly below an x4240 in one of my racks... the 7110 > has no issues reporting disks properly. > > > BIOS is indeed an issue. In many x86/x64 PC architecture designs, and the > current enumeration design of Solaris, > if you add controller cards, or move a controller card, after a previous OS > installation, then the controller numbers > and ordering changes on all the devices. ZFS apparently does not care, but > UFS would, since bios designates a specific > disk to boot from, and the OS would have a specific boot path including a > controller number such as > /dev/dsk/c3t4d0s0 that could change, hence no longer boot. > > Getting to EFI firmware, dumping BIOS, and redesigning the Solaris device > enumeration framework would > make things a little more flexible in that type of scenario. > > How does any of that affect an x4500 with onboard controllers that can't ever be moved? --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
