OUCH.

My last two years in SV I lived in Santa Clara, which has its own independent municipal electric utility. Did not miss PG&E one iota.

What will be missing if I use sharemgr for SMB shares instead of dataset shares? I guess the Windows "shadow copies" that automatically are generated from ZFS snapshots? Anything else?

andyf our ppt driver does not allow for ReBAR under bhyve right?

unixery: i think that'd probably be it.. but can't say 100% for sure

What about NFSv4 ACL?

I probably just give it a try...

I'm not sure you'd miss anything, it would seem sloppy if you did, to me

gwr would know for sure, possibly tsoome and jbk too

they should work fine

sharemgr by itself is just management tool, the NFSv4 ACL feature depends on the actual file system really.

with SMB or NFSv4 (NFSv4 you should make sure you NFSv4 domains match)

yeah.. under the covers when you 'zfs set sharesmb=xxxx' it's more or less invoking the same library calls

IIRC there's a little special bit with putting the zfs managed stuff in its own group or something like that I'd have to re-look at to remember the specifics

i'm wonder if anyone would object to removing the sun-specific SMART DATA VPC page for SATA disks... it was never documented, and you can get the exact same info via a ATA PASSTHROUGH command (this is what smartctl does)

it was implemented in a rather annoying way

in that every other VPC page has a nice fixed-sized header w/ the page code, length, etc.

except this one

if there are no conceivable consumers for it I'd say torch it.

if anything ever used it, it had to be some sort of internal Sun tool that never saw the light of day outside of sun

remember there was also SUNWhd for thumper

as far as weird tools that look at sata

which i'm guessing is all closed source?

no idea, honestly. probably? I'm not even sure where to find it.

it was just a sun-specific sata thing, so I mentioned it