FreeNAS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Chris,

Let me clarify a few things regarding terminology and what Sun meant
when they were creating ZFS.

You are correct that ZFS consists pool, a zpool. But lets start even
further back.

At the very bottom, you have disks. These disks come together to
create a virtual device. A zpool is created out of one or more virtual
devices, or vdev.

A pool then can be chopped up in to datasets. A dataset is essentially
a partition in old disk terms. A dataset is an optional entity. It is
completely a logical segregation of the zpool.

When you create 1 dataset, it does in fact appear to "consume" the
entire zpool. However this ideology is slightly incorrect. A dataset
doesn't consume anything like a partition does on a disk. A dataset
inherits all the properties of the container above it, in this case
the zpool. Therefore your dataset can use all the disk space that is
available to the zpool.

When you create a 2nd and 3rd dataset, you will find that they too can
use all the disk space that is available to the zpool. You would
usually put a quota on a dataset so that you don't have disk space
contention among the pools.

So lets look at your example in more detail

/Server <-- this is the zpool, it can also be used to store files and
be shared
/Server/Work <-- this is a dataset, it is a logical segregated area of
a zpool.

Your mention of the interface in r5648 is interesting. I am running
r5543. I don't believe that creating a share should also create a ZFS
dataset. This feature is meant to work with all kinds of file systems,
and not just ZFS. Also, you lose the flexibility of being able to use
the zpool itself for storage. Not everyone will have a complex dataset
setup with their ZFS pools.

I hope this better explains ZFS and its architecture. If you have any
questions regarding that please let me know. UI suggestions still
should be looked at by FreeNAS devs.

On 12/11/10 11:21 AM, Chris Meyer wrote:
> In FreeNAS r5648, there is no way to create additional mount points in
the UI.
>
> However, I think something more fundamental is wrong. So before added
> a new Ticket, I decided to bring up the discussion here.
>
> ZFS consists of pools (zpool) and file systems (zfs). File systems
> must be created within a pool. In addition, the first file system
> represents the entire pool.
>
> When FreeNAS creates shares, I think it should create a new file
> system within a particular pool and it is the sub-filesystem which
> should be the share, not the pool itself.
>
> So for instance, if I have the following pool and file systems:
>
> Pool: Server 1TB
> /Server <-- this represents the entire pool and shouldn't be a "share"
> /Server/Work
> /Server/Play
> /Server/Miscellaneous
>
> The last three items (all created with zfs create ...) should be the
"shares".
>
> Currently, there are two tabs for configuring storage and
> sharepoints.In the 'storage' tab, the UI shows the entries of the SQL
> table 'storage_mountpoint'. Unfortunately, the 'share' tab also shows
> the entries from 'storage_mountpoint'.
>
> So what should it be?
>
> I think 'storage' should show the entries in 'storage_volume'. These
> are the zpools. There should be one zpool per set of physical disks
> (i.e. per set of raided physical volumes).
>
> I think 'share' should show the entries in 'storage_mountpoint'.
> Creating a share should create a zfs within a zpool and that should be
> the share point.
>
> Finally, since a particular share point could be visible on the
> network as a 'smb' or an 'afp' share, the UI for deciding what 'share
> points' are shared for a specific protocol needs to be independent of
> the list of 'share points'. I.e. /mnt/Server/Work could be shared via
> both smb and afp. So perhaps a simple checkbox for each of the
> protocols on the 'share' page would be better?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for
PL/SQL,
> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel

- -- 
Steve King

Senior Linux Engineer - Advance Internet, Inc.
Cisco Certified Network Associate
CompTIA Linux+ Certified Professional
CompTIA A+ Certified Professional
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNA9DEAAoJEOG6AA4q5CVZGKAIAI06nZaSzN2NKsC3leO0Lmby
9ndrXQv282kagrB54UZMgjHtyLdLv2GuTGEC6ZQoyk98TbCckFZJM2aLCK1hbJde
q+2XX7hnv3RXuPLtRhxRGambijFIVpVoF+3B+nlbRwysUz+l/5o0z+yJHZKHvzvy
32r+RE8MuG2M+3gc1qCiqP3ErMkmBkf+lCqG+dkFMKgHkxucwlCSYQA2VcEDr738
+U5EcNtuQ+ztWpkH5KK1yxgvbcFtpU+hoP5uZgq/CnpWL0NsLAR+g9mNbFfOIxua
IZHchebXyjtygWGQQPX0q5LD/vQvPoHXC9SAvNh6fdkJ0D6oJ7UOolM9beX3lXw=
=RP4U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the additional info about physical disks and datasets; and
I understand the need to be compatible with ufs (and other file
systems).

However, I think you're confusing terms. The following ZFS
administration guide is helpful:

http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ftyue?l=en&a=view

A dataset is any of the following: clones, file systems, snapshots, or
volumes. A clone is a copy of a snapshot. A volume is a physical
device.

What I propose is best for FreeNAS share points (on ZFS) are *file
systems*. On non-ZFS systems, share points would have to be
directories.

On ZFS, different share points might have different characteristics
such as quotas, compression, multiple copies, checksumming and
snapshot requirements.

-Chris

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Steven King <sking@...> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Let me clarify a few things regarding terminology and what Sun meant
> when they were creating ZFS.
>
> You are correct that ZFS consists pool, a zpool. But lets start even
> further back.
>
> At the very bottom, you have disks. These disks come together to
> create a virtual device. A zpool is created out of one or more virtual
> devices, or vdev.
>
> A pool then can be chopped up in to datasets. A dataset is essentially
> a partition in old disk terms. A dataset is an optional entity. It is
> completely a logical segregation of the zpool.
>
> When you create 1 dataset, it does in fact appear to "consume" the
> entire zpool. However this ideology is slightly incorrect. A dataset
> doesn't consume anything like a partition does on a disk. A dataset
> inherits all the properties of the container above it, in this case
> the zpool. Therefore your dataset can use all the disk space that is
> available to the zpool.
>
> When you create a 2nd and 3rd dataset, you will find that they too can
> use all the disk space that is available to the zpool. You would
> usually put a quota on a dataset so that you don't have disk space
> contention among the pools.
>
> So lets look at your example in more detail
>
> /Server <-- this is the zpool, it can also be used to store files and
> be shared
> /Server/Work <-- this is a dataset, it is a logical segregated area of
> a zpool.
>
> Your mention of the interface in r5648 is interesting. I am running
> r5543. I don't believe that creating a share should also create a ZFS
> dataset. This feature is meant to work with all kinds of file systems,
> and not just ZFS. Also, you lose the flexibility of being able to use
> the zpool itself for storage. Not everyone will have a complex dataset
> setup with their ZFS pools.
>
> I hope this better explains ZFS and its architecture. If you have any
> questions regarding that please let me know. UI suggestions still
> should be looked at by FreeNAS devs.
>
> On 12/11/10 11:21 AM, Chris Meyer wrote:
>> In FreeNAS r5648, there is no way to create additional mount points in
> the UI.
>>
>> However, I think something more fundamental is wrong. So before added
>> a new Ticket, I decided to bring up the discussion here.
>>
>> ZFS consists of pools (zpool) and file systems (zfs). File systems
>> must be created within a pool. In addition, the first file system
>> represents the entire pool.
>>
>> When FreeNAS creates shares, I think it should create a new file
>> system within a particular pool and it is the sub-filesystem which
>> should be the share, not the pool itself.
>>
>> So for instance, if I have the following pool and file systems:
>>
>> Pool: Server 1TB
>> /Server <-- this represents the entire pool and shouldn't be a "share"
>> /Server/Work
>> /Server/Play
>> /Server/Miscellaneous
>>
>> The last three items (all created with zfs create ...) should be the
> "shares".
>>
>> Currently, there are two tabs for configuring storage and
>> sharepoints.In the 'storage' tab, the UI shows the entries of the SQL
>> table 'storage_mountpoint'. Unfortunately, the 'share' tab also shows
>> the entries from 'storage_mountpoint'.
>>
>> So what should it be?
>>
>> I think 'storage' should show the entries in 'storage_volume'. These
>> are the zpools. There should be one zpool per set of physical disks
>> (i.e. per set of raided physical volumes).
>>
>> I think 'share' should show the entries in 'storage_mountpoint'.
>> Creating a share should create a zfs within a zpool and that should be
>> the share point.
>>
>> Finally, since a particular share point could be visible on the
>> network as a 'smb' or an 'afp' share, the UI for deciding what 'share
>> points' are shared for a specific protocol needs to be independent of
>> the list of 'share points'. I.e. /mnt/Server/Work could be shared via
>> both smb and afp. So perhaps a simple checkbox for each of the
>> protocols on the 'share' page would be better?
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for
> PL/SQL,
>> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
>> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Freenas-devel mailing list
>> Freenas-devel@...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel
>
> - --
> Steve King
>
> Senior Linux Engineer - Advance Internet, Inc.
> Cisco Certified Network Associate
> CompTIA Linux+ Certified Professional
> CompTIA A+ Certified Professional
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNA9DEAAoJEOG6AA4q5CVZGKAIAI06nZaSzN2NKsC3leO0Lmby
> 9ndrXQv282kagrB54UZMgjHtyLdLv2GuTGEC6ZQoyk98TbCckFZJM2aLCK1hbJde
> q+2XX7hnv3RXuPLtRhxRGambijFIVpVoF+3B+nlbRwysUz+l/5o0z+yJHZKHvzvy
> 32r+RE8MuG2M+3gc1qCiqP3ErMkmBkf+lCqG+dkFMKgHkxucwlCSYQA2VcEDr738
> +U5EcNtuQ+ztWpkH5KK1yxgvbcFtpU+hoP5uZgq/CnpWL0NsLAR+g9mNbFfOIxua
> IZHchebXyjtygWGQQPX0q5LD/vQvPoHXC9SAvNh6fdkJ0D6oJ7UOolM9beX3lXw=
> =RP4U
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for PL/SQL,
> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel
>

On 12/11/2010 09:21, Chris Meyer wrote:
> In FreeNAS r5648, there is no way to create additional mount points in the UI.
>
> However, I think something more fundamental is wrong. So before added
> a new Ticket, I decided to bring up the discussion here.
>
> ZFS consists of pools (zpool) and file systems (zfs). File systems
> must be created within a pool. In addition, the first file system
> represents the entire pool.
>
> When FreeNAS creates shares, I think it should create a new file
> system within a particular pool and it is the sub-filesystem which
> should be the share, not the pool itself.
>
> So for instance, if I have the following pool and file systems:
>
> Pool: Server 1TB
>    /Server<-- this represents the entire pool and shouldn't be a "share"
>    /Server/Work
>    /Server/Play
>    /Server/Miscellaneous
>
> The last three items (all created with zfs create ...) should be the "shares".
They wouldn't be shares.  They would be subdirectories.  One key concept 
of our current UI is that one cannot share things at a granularity 
smaller than a mount point.  I insisted on this for simplicity, and also 
because I thought 0.7 did this also.
> Currently, there are two tabs for configuring storage and
> sharepoints.In the 'storage' tab, the UI shows the entries of the SQL
> table 'storage_mountpoint'. Unfortunately, the 'share' tab also shows
> the entries from 'storage_mountpoint'.
>
> So what should it be?
>
> I think 'storage' should show the entries in 'storage_volume'. These
> are the zpools. There should be one zpool per set of physical disks
> (i.e. per set of raided physical volumes).
>
> I think 'share' should show the entries in 'storage_mountpoint'.
> Creating a share should create a zfs within a zpool and that should be
> the share point.
>
> Finally, since a particular share point could be visible on the
> network as a 'smb' or an 'afp' share, the UI for deciding what 'share
> points' are shared for a specific protocol needs to be independent of
> the list of 'share points'. I.e. /mnt/Server/Work could be shared via
> both smb and afp. So perhaps a simple checkbox for each of the
> protocols on the 'share' page would be better?
>
I think the way out is actually simpler than what you propose.  Creating 
zfs data sets is an orthogonal problem to the what do we share problem.

Adding the ability to share at a level that is finer-grained than a 
mountpoint solves all these issues.

Even today, btw, the shares are per-protocol.  So you can share 
something via nfs, but not samba or afp.

Warner

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for PL/SQL,
> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel

On 12/11/2010 15:47, Chris Meyer wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> Thanks for the additional info about physical disks and datasets; and
> I understand the need to be compatible with ufs (and other file
> systems).
>
> However, I think you're confusing terms. The following ZFS
> administration guide is helpful:
>
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ftyue?l=en&a=view
>
> A dataset is any of the following: clones, file systems, snapshots, or
> volumes. A clone is a copy of a snapshot. A volume is a physical
> device.
>
> What I propose is best for FreeNAS share points (on ZFS) are *file
> systems*. On non-ZFS systems, share points would have to be
> directories.
>
> On ZFS, different share points might have different characteristics
> such as quotas, compression, multiple copies, checksumming and
> snapshot requirements.
I'd propose something simpler.  Shares are done at or below the level of 
a mointpoint.  ZFS a moint point is the root of the zpool.  It makes 
sense to allow sharing of an entire zpool, even if parts of it have 
different quotas, permissions, etc.  I don't think we should 
artificially tie the two together.

Warner
> -Chris
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Steven King<sking@...>  wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> Let me clarify a few things regarding terminology and what Sun meant
>> when they were creating ZFS.
>>
>> You are correct that ZFS consists pool, a zpool. But lets start even
>> further back.
>>
>> At the very bottom, you have disks. These disks come together to
>> create a virtual device. A zpool is created out of one or more virtual
>> devices, or vdev.
>>
>> A pool then can be chopped up in to datasets. A dataset is essentially
>> a partition in old disk terms. A dataset is an optional entity. It is
>> completely a logical segregation of the zpool.
>>
>> When you create 1 dataset, it does in fact appear to "consume" the
>> entire zpool. However this ideology is slightly incorrect. A dataset
>> doesn't consume anything like a partition does on a disk. A dataset
>> inherits all the properties of the container above it, in this case
>> the zpool. Therefore your dataset can use all the disk space that is
>> available to the zpool.
>>
>> When you create a 2nd and 3rd dataset, you will find that they too can
>> use all the disk space that is available to the zpool. You would
>> usually put a quota on a dataset so that you don't have disk space
>> contention among the pools.
>>
>> So lets look at your example in more detail
>>
>> /Server<-- this is the zpool, it can also be used to store files and
>> be shared
>> /Server/Work<-- this is a dataset, it is a logical segregated area of
>> a zpool.
>>
>> Your mention of the interface in r5648 is interesting. I am running
>> r5543. I don't believe that creating a share should also create a ZFS
>> dataset. This feature is meant to work with all kinds of file systems,
>> and not just ZFS. Also, you lose the flexibility of being able to use
>> the zpool itself for storage. Not everyone will have a complex dataset
>> setup with their ZFS pools.
>>
>> I hope this better explains ZFS and its architecture. If you have any
>> questions regarding that please let me know. UI suggestions still
>> should be looked at by FreeNAS devs.
>>
>> On 12/11/10 11:21 AM, Chris Meyer wrote:
>>> In FreeNAS r5648, there is no way to create additional mount points in
>> the UI.
>>> However, I think something more fundamental is wrong. So before added
>>> a new Ticket, I decided to bring up the discussion here.
>>>
>>> ZFS consists of pools (zpool) and file systems (zfs). File systems
>>> must be created within a pool. In addition, the first file system
>>> represents the entire pool.
>>>
>>> When FreeNAS creates shares, I think it should create a new file
>>> system within a particular pool and it is the sub-filesystem which
>>> should be the share, not the pool itself.
>>>
>>> So for instance, if I have the following pool and file systems:
>>>
>>> Pool: Server 1TB
>>> /Server<-- this represents the entire pool and shouldn't be a "share"
>>> /Server/Work
>>> /Server/Play
>>> /Server/Miscellaneous
>>>
>>> The last three items (all created with zfs create ...) should be the
>> "shares".
>>> Currently, there are two tabs for configuring storage and
>>> sharepoints.In the 'storage' tab, the UI shows the entries of the SQL
>>> table 'storage_mountpoint'. Unfortunately, the 'share' tab also shows
>>> the entries from 'storage_mountpoint'.
>>>
>>> So what should it be?
>>>
>>> I think 'storage' should show the entries in 'storage_volume'. These
>>> are the zpools. There should be one zpool per set of physical disks
>>> (i.e. per set of raided physical volumes).
>>>
>>> I think 'share' should show the entries in 'storage_mountpoint'.
>>> Creating a share should create a zfs within a zpool and that should be
>>> the share point.
>>>
>>> Finally, since a particular share point could be visible on the
>>> network as a 'smb' or an 'afp' share, the UI for deciding what 'share
>>> points' are shared for a specific protocol needs to be independent of
>>> the list of 'share points'. I.e. /mnt/Server/Work could be shared via
>>> both smb and afp. So perhaps a simple checkbox for each of the
>>> protocols on the 'share' page would be better?
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for
>> PL/SQL,
>>> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
>>> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Freenas-devel mailing list
>>> Freenas-devel@...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel
>> - --
>> Steve King
>>
>> Senior Linux Engineer - Advance Internet, Inc.
>> Cisco Certified Network Associate
>> CompTIA Linux+ Certified Professional
>> CompTIA A+ Certified Professional
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>
>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNA9DEAAoJEOG6AA4q5CVZGKAIAI06nZaSzN2NKsC3leO0Lmby
>> 9ndrXQv282kagrB54UZMgjHtyLdLv2GuTGEC6ZQoyk98TbCckFZJM2aLCK1hbJde
>> q+2XX7hnv3RXuPLtRhxRGambijFIVpVoF+3B+nlbRwysUz+l/5o0z+yJHZKHvzvy
>> 32r+RE8MuG2M+3gc1qCiqP3ErMkmBkf+lCqG+dkFMKgHkxucwlCSYQA2VcEDr738
>> +U5EcNtuQ+ztWpkH5KK1yxgvbcFtpU+hoP5uZgq/CnpWL0NsLAR+g9mNbFfOIxua
>> IZHchebXyjtygWGQQPX0q5LD/vQvPoHXC9SAvNh6fdkJ0D6oJ7UOolM9beX3lXw=
>> =RP4U
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for PL/SQL,
>> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
>> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Freenas-devel mailing list
>> Freenas-devel@...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle to DB2 Conversion Guide: Learn learn about native support for PL/SQL,
> new data types, scalar functions, improved concurrency, built-in packages,
> OCI, SQL*Plus, data movement tools, best practices and more.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel

On 12/11/2010 13:59, Roger Marquis wrote:
> Don't know if this is a development feature, security hole, or privacy
> best practices issue but there is a javascript XSS in 8r5648 which loads
> "https://getfirebug.com/firebug-lite.js".
This was a debugging aide accidentally left in.  It has already been 
removed.
> The script itself looks fine but its implementation by xss raises a
> couple of issues:
>
>    1) Do FreeNAS (alpha/beta/release) appliance users have an expectation
>    that their usage will not be tracked by google/getfirebug or other
>    remote business entities without an opt-in or opt-out dialog?
I think they likely have no expectations either way, to be honest.  I'm 
unaware of any tracking that's going on with this script.
>    2) Can this javascript be loaded and executed locally i.e., without the
>    xss?  If not why not?
You should view this as a 'debugging printf' that was left in by mistake 
in a development release.
>    3) Should development features be loaded onto end-user browsers without
>    their explicit approval?
The answer is "it depends."  Development features are routinely enabled 
in development software.  FreeBSD enables witness, for example, in its 
development releases.  In this case, it was nothing more than an honest 
oversight.
>    4) Could IXSystems be held liable if the firebug-lite.js script were
>    hacked or otherwise exploited to access a local server or client?
Interesting question...
> Clearly firebug is an important development tool, but shouldn't the use
> of XSS by potentially unsuspecting end-users, many of whom are not
> developers, be addressed by policy, privacy-related or other?
All other javascript comes from the freenas box.

Warner

The ports are used to build the packages that are used on later  
builds. There is a bug right now if you don't specify -b that deletes  
the packages, forcing a from ports build.

I should fix that. :)

Warner


On Dec 4, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Brad Waite <lists@...> wrote:

> Is there a way to specify that FreeNAS/NanoBSD build with packages
> instead of ports?
>
> The scsi_target stuff I'm working on requires rebuilds of kernel and
> userland, but the longest part of the build process is the ports. So
> far, I don't see a reason NOT to use the pre-built packages. Correct  
> me
> if I'm misinformed.
>
> Alternatively, is there a better/smarter way to build a kernel module
> and/or userland bits without buildworld and buildkernel?
>
> -Brad Waite
>
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another  
> costly
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time  
> to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier  
> to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the  
> Lotus
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel

The plan is to move from 512mb media to 1g media and have the pingpong  
slices for in place upgrades. The from cd upgrades include the  
database migrations a pingpong upgrade would also need.

Warner


On Dec 4, 2010, at 12:55 PM, Brad Waite <lists@...> wrote:

> The NanoBSD Howto suggests that an in-place upgrade can happen with a
> spare partition on the boot device and the /root/updatep* scripts. Any
> reason why FreeNAS couldn't support this?
>
> If we can force a boot to a specific partition w/out user  
> intervention,
> I suspect that would make for a great upgrade process. From the GUI  
> the
> user could download the latest image to the second partition and
> initiate an upgrade. After two reboots, the process is done.
>
> This isn't to knock the recent FreeNAS upgrade ability, which I assume
> is still based on a install-from-CD approach?
>
> -Brad Waite
>
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another  
> costly
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time  
> to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier  
> to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the  
> Lotus
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Freenas-devel mailing list
> Freenas-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freenas-devel