Subject: Re: partition bookkeeping
To: Greywolf <>
From: Oleg Polyanski <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 09/22/1999 22:25:53
>>>>> "G" == Greywolf  writes:

 G> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Frank van der Linden wrote: # # Now, what should be
 G> discussed (and has been) is a naming scheme # for device nodes. It's a
 G> good opportunity to get rid of # the mess that is wd/sd naming, 'c' or
 G> 'd' for the name of the # "raw" disk device, etc.

 G> I will agree with getting rid of 'c' or 'd', great.

 G> But what does discarding wd/sd buy us?

 G> Keeping it makes it easier to identify disks on disparate controllers.

	I'm not   sure that it  makes our   life easier.   Right  now we have
	floating disk naming scheme - disk detected first will get number `0'
	even  if it has, for example,  SCSI ID 5 so  when I  add another disk
	with SCSI ID number  2 (for example, I would  like to add  large /opt
	file system)   it becomes first (i.e.   sd0),  not the former `first'
	disk.  You  cannot mount root  fs without  editing your `/etc/fstab'.
	It's  weird.  Disk  naming   scheme must  depend on  device  physical
	properties  (SCSI  ID, master/slave or   something like that).  But I
	don't think that  Solaris naming  scheme is perfect  -  it depends in
	much degree on underlying hardware,  where each device or  controller
	maps to  the right slot that makes  the life of service engineer much
	easier   with UE6000,  for example;  if   you  will take  a  look  on
	Solaris/x86  you  will  see that naming  scheme  is   emulated  on PC
	hardware and that is why it looks so unnatural.

	Something like


	probably would be better but..

	Another  solution  would   be  logical  volume   manager  that  would
	completely avoid the separation between  different devices but it's a
	huge work.