tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: ZFS - mounting filesystems (Was CVS commit: src/etc)

Brad Spencer <> writes:

> Martin Husemann <> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 08:30:11AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>> I still don't understand and object to this "zfs is special" notion.
>> It is special because it just does not use /etc/fstab (usually).
>> I don't like this part either, but we probably don't want to make our
>> ZFS different from others (or force "legacy" markers).

I understand that.   But I  don't think it is justification to treat it
differently.   We have a design that's obviously ok (critical boolean),
and the only objections are:

  1) it's work to do it

  2) having tunables for which there is no point is just complexity for
  no gain.

However, point 2 applies to the entire notion of not mounting any local
filesystem early.

> The dynamic inheritance that one can do with filesets (allowing a new
> fileset to be carved out of an existing one perhaps with different
> properties) makes the use of the /etc files very troubled especially
> when you delegate fileset administration to someone other than root.
> The ZFS legacy marker more or less says that I don't want to do that
> with this entity and won't make use of these abilities.

Yes, but we aren't talking about prohibiting using normal zfs admin.
Just a simple way to logically add a zfs volume into
critical_filesystems_local with a property.

I realize why things have to be done a bit different, and I don't object
to that.  What I object to is "zfs is special and should have different
semantics from other local filesystems".

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index