Subject: Re: > 1T filesystems, disklabels, etc
To: David Laight <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/20/2002 15:49:20
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, David Laight wrote:
> > As I understand the original idea, wedges just get found, like lv's on
> > AIX's LVM system. The kernel's root is always wedge0, and wedges other
> > than root get added by a userland daemon. If disks show up in a different
> > order (like a drive was off-line at boot one time while on-line the
> > other), their partitions show up as different wedges. Say you add another
> > partition to a disk, then either the new partition has a wedge number
> > quite distant from the other wedges on the disk, or wedge numbers move
> > around. That's all bad.
> I would have a file that contained what you found on the last
> boot, and what you called it.
Please read the proposal. The wedge proposal (or the all-partitions-in-
one-pool add-on to diskpart) has such a file. Thus the, "the new partition
has a wedge number quite distant from the other wedges on the disk,"
Other than the fact that root is wedge0.
> So if another disk appears, another controller appears,
> a partition gets added to the dos extended partition list (these
> are in sector order) none of the existing 'partitions' change
> their identity.
> It might be necessary to read this info directly by the kernel
> during boot, but I would use a process to update the file or
> to dynamically change any (inactive) map.
Agreed, and that's why I don't like it. :-)