Is changing /etc/path_to_inst a good way?
Are you sure that's even supported?
That would be very, very difficult. The reason the interfaces are different
are because the two machines are using different drivers. This isn't
surpising, since they're two different machines.
> Is changing /etc/path_to_inst a good way?
No.
Why is this needed? Does Veritas demand it? If it's going to trip over
an interface name, then I suspect there's going to be lots of other stuff
that will cause you problems between those two machines.
--
Brandon Hume - hume -> BOFH.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Ca/
Anything that requires/relies on a certain interface name is seriously
bogus anyway. Please replace that broken software.
Bye,
Wolfgang.
ce cards won't work/fit in a 5220
Oh well, bye bye Oracle RAC & Veritas Cluster at least. Once Solaris
gains the ability to rename interfaces - which is common in other Unixes
- it won't be a problem.
Pete
You don't need to. You can used mixed interfaces in VCS.
> Oh well, bye bye Oracle RAC & Veritas Cluster at least. Once Solaris
> gains the ability to rename interfaces - which is common in other Unixes
> - it won't be a problem.
It would (probably) be a good thing to be able to rename interfaces,
but the amount of testing required would be quite large, I think (who
knows how many things secretly rely on the fact that the interface
name tells you the type?). it would also, obviously, be a really good
thing if these applications did not make such obviously silly
assumptions.
--tim
I haven't touched RAC, but VCS certainly doesn't require that the
interface names be the same on all nodes (although it does simplify the
setup if they are).
You can provide per-node interface names within the IP resource.
> It would (probably) be a good thing to be able to rename interfaces,
> but the amount of testing required would be quite large, I think (who
> knows how many things secretly rely on the fact that the interface
> name tells you the type?). it would also, obviously, be a really good
> thing if these applications did not make such obviously silly
> assumptions.
A long time ago I renamed an interface by renaming the driver binary
(and references to it in path_to_inst and name_to_major). I can't
remember exactly why we were trying that. Everything worked pretty
well. I tried it recently on a S10 box and didn't have the same
success. There were always problems that kept it from working. I think
it's driver-dependent whether this is possible or not (seemed like the
driver name was hard-coded in the binary on my recent attempt).
One of the opensolaris projects will allow interface renaming when
complete. Won't help current S10 users, though.
--
Darren