disk partitioning with gmirror + gpt + gjournal (RFC)

[Alfred Bartsch]

Am 18.10.2011 12:08, schrieb Nicolas Rachinsky:
> * Alfred Bartsch <bartsch at dssgmbh.de> [2011-10-18 11:41 +0200]:
>> Thanks for pointing this out. I'm using filesystem labels
>> (tunefs), no GEOM labels other than gmirror.
> 
> ufs labels are handled by glabel.
> 
>> After executing "gmirror remove gm0 <disk1>, the partitions on
>> this disk show up as <disk1>p#, not as mirror/gm0p#, so there is
>> IMHO no ambiguity. If you have experienced problems with gmirror
>> - glabel configurations, I'm interested in more details.
> 
> But <disk1>p# contains the same filesystem with the same label as 
> mirror/gm0p#. If glabel sees <disk1>p# on boot before mirror/gm0p#
> it may associate ufs/<name> with <disk1>p# instead of
> mirror/gm0p#.
> 
> This can happen with "glabel label"-labels, ufs-labels and
> gpt-labels.
> 

Thanks for clarifying this. As I'm looking for a robust configuration,
I will refrain from applying any of these labels until a consistent
usage will be possible.

So with some minor changes the configuration looks like
...
create the UFS file systems (without anylabels):
# newfs -J mirror/gm0p7.journal
# newfs -J mirror/gm0p8.journal
# newfs -J mirror/gm0p9.journal
# newfs -J mirror/gm0p10.journal
...
/etc/fstab could then look like
# Device                Mountpoint FStype Options          Dump Pass#
/dev/mirror/gm0p2          none    swap   sw               0    0
/dev/mirror/gm0p7.journal  /       ufs    rw,noatime,async 1    1
/dev/mirror/gm0p10.journal /home   ufs    rw,noatime,async 2    2
/dev/mirror/gm0p9.journal  /usr    ufs    rw,noatime,async 2    2
/dev/mirror/gm0p8.journal  /var    ufs    rw,noatime,async 2    2

> 
> If you want verbose names, you might be able to use gconcat (with
> one component) since gconcat can use hardcoded provider names,
> which should avoid this problem.
> 
> It would be nice to add the possibility to hardcode providers to 
> glabel.

It's IMHO not the only weakness concerning glabel.

Are there any other objections to this method of disk partitioning?

-- 
Alfred Bartsch
Data-Service GmbH