--Jauder
On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:
> Michael Neuffer writes:
> > On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Richard Gooch wrote:
> > > > This allows then to stay compatible with their naming sheme but has the
> > > > drawback of dropping support for LUNs. This only works properly for the
> > > > special case of the SSAs since you only have disk drives in them.
> > > >
> > > > However I do not think that we should make the same mistake as them
> > > > and cut ourselves off from supporting multi LUN devices.
> > >
> > > Agreed! Considering this, I'm open to alternative naming schemes, but
> > > only if they preserve the information.
> >
> > The easiest would be to add a field so that it looks like the following:
> >
> > cCbBtTdDsS
> >
> > <C> == controller
> > <B> == bus/channel on controller
> > <T> == target (ID)
> > <D> == LUN
> > <S> == slice/partition
>
> Well, perhaps. The down side to doing that is I'd have to edit the
> code and change all my compatibility symlinks and my
> /etc/fstab :-( However if there is a general push to adopting your
> modified Solaris scheme, I'll go with that.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard....
>
ADVISORY: There Is an Extremely Small but Nonzero Chance That, Through a
Process Known as 'Tunneling,' This Message May Spontaneously Disappear
from Its Present Location and Reappear at Any Random Place in the
Universe, Including Your Neighbour's Kitchen. The Author Will Not Be
Responsible for Any Damages or Inconveniences That May Result.