From owner-freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 10 15:17:15 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F2B10656C8 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:17:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@deman.com) Received: from cp11.openaccess.org (cp11.openaccess.org [66.114.41.130]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A1098FC16 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:17:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mono-sis1.s.bli.openaccess.org ([66.114.32.149] helo=[192.168.2.226]) by cp11.openaccess.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ou577-0002fJ-6m; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:02:05 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Michael DeMan In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:02:01 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1C266502-EAF4-4211-93E1-83BA1090C94E@deman.com> References: To: Andrew Hotlab X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cp11.openaccess.org X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - deman.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org, freebsd@snap.net.nz Subject: Re: Jail hot migration X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:17:15 -0000 See inline. On Sep 10, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Andrew Hotlab wrote: >=20 >> Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:28:15 +1200 >> From: freebsd@snap.net.nz >> To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org >> Subject: Jail hot migration >>=20 >> Hi guys, >>=20 >> I was lately thinking around jail hot-migration feature where one = jail >> could be moved from one host to another without >> shutting it down, something like vmotion in VMware world. >>=20 >> The storage layer should be easy with zfs send and receive or some = form >> of shared storage. The tricky part would >> be a memory copy from one node to another and also the CPU handling. >>=20 >> Anyone has an idea how this could be achieved? I guess it would = require >> a kernel module which could take care of memory >> reservations and a daemon to copy and incrementally sync the jails >> memory across. >>=20 >> Then also there is the CPU problem.. >>=20 >> Sounds like a fair amount of work and development. >>=20 >> All comments are welcomed! >>=20 > Well, I'm not a developer, but I think that the jail framework surely = deservestobe evolved in something more "friendly" from a sysadmin's = point of view. > The architecture is great, and that's just enough to consolidate a lot = of workloads,but for some applications there are features (resource = containers, offline andonline migration of jails, etc.) that need to be = improved to be affordable in aproduction environment. > I think that a lot of work is getting done (resource container and = virtualizationstack projects have ben just sponsored by the FreeBSD = Foundation), I do not knowhow much time will take to reach a complete = "business-ready" virtualizationframework, neither if they are on the = right path, but I'm quite confident, because I'msure that the simplicity = of the FreeBSD solution will rule any other virtualizationframework out = there. > As the feature you are asking for, I think that resource containers = and offlinemigration should be considered first, because overall they'll = have more impact onbusiness environments. Further, I believe that = building a hot migration procedureworking with third-party running = applications will be a very complex task to achieve,maybe too expensive = at this time, compared to the amount of work required. > That's an interesting argument, I'll be glad if more member of the = Community willcontribute with their considerations. > Sincerely. >=20 Sorry, I'm accustomed to 'top positing' - LIFO - polish notation. Anyway, yes, is it no the plan that ezjail-admin *MIGHT* be integrated = into the FreeBSD core release? Once that is done, anybody could feel = comfortable writing a webmin module to manage jails?