Using GTP and glabel for ZFS arrays

[Dan Langille]

On 7/22/2010 3:08 AM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:02:33AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
>> On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>>> On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
>>>> I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
>>>>
>>>> atapci0:<SiI 3124 SATA300 controller>   port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem
>>>> 0xfbeffc00-0xfbeffc7f,0xfbef0000-0xfbef7fff irq 17 at device 4.0 on pci7
>>>>
>>>> atapci1:<SiI 3124 SATA300 controller>   port 0xac00-0xac0f mem
>>>> 0xfbbffc00-0xfbbffc7f,0xfbbf0000-0xfbbf7fff irq 19 at device 4.0 on pci3
>>>>
>>>> I added ahci_load="YES" to loader.conf and rebooted.  Now I see:
>>>
>>> You can add siis_load="YES" to loader.conf for SiI 3124.
>>
>> Ahh, thank you.
>>
>> I'm afraid to do that now, before I label my ZFS drives for fear
>> that the ZFS array will be messed up.  But I do plan to do that for
>> the system after my plan is implemented.  Thank you.  :)
>
> They won't be messed up.  ZFS will figure out, using its metadata, which
> drive is part of what pool despite the device name changing.

I now have:
siis0: <SiI3124 SATA controller> port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem 
0xfbeffc00-0xfbeffc7f,0xfbef0000-0xfbef7fff irq 17 at device 4.0 on pci7

siis1: <SiI3124 SATA controller> port 0xac00-0xac0f mem 
0xfbbffc00-0xfbbffc7f,0xfbbf0000-0xfbbf7fff irq 19 at device 4.0 on pci3

And my zpool is now:

$ zpool status
   pool: storage
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: none requested
config:

         NAME        STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
         storage     ONLINE       0     0     0
           raidz1    ONLINE       0     0     0
             ada0    ONLINE       0     0     0
             ada1    ONLINE       0     0     0
             ada2    ONLINE       0     0     0
             ada3    ONLINE       0     0     0
             ada4    ONLINE       0     0     0

Whereas previously, it was ad devices (see 
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=399538+0+current/freebsd-stable).

Thank you (and to Andrey V. Elsukov who posted the same suggestion at 
the same time you did).  I appreciate it.

 > I don't
> use glabel or GPT so I can't comment on whether or not those work
> reliably in this situation (I imagine they would, but I keep seeing
> problem reports on the lists when people have them in use.......)

Really?  The whole basis of the action plan I'm highlighting in this 
post is to avoid ZFS-related problems when devices get renumbered and 
ZFS is using device names (e.g. /dev/ad0> instead of labels (e.g. 
gpt/disk00).

-- 
Dan Langille - http://langille.org/