Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Sep 2010 12:36:42 +0000
From:      Andrew Hotlab <andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com>
To:        <freebsd@snap.net.nz>, <freebsd-jail@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Jail hot migration
Message-ID:  <SNT139-w26186EAFF90CA493C82CEEF6740@phx.gbl>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> Date: Fri=2C 10 Sep 2010 16:28:15 +1200
> From: freebsd@snap.net.nz
> To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org
> Subject: Jail hot migration
>
> Hi guys=2C
>
> I was lately thinking around jail hot-migration feature where one jail
> could be moved from one host to another without
> shutting it down=2C something like vmotion in VMware world.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> Then also there is the CPU problem..
>
> Sounds like a fair amount of work and development.
>
> All comments are welcomed!
>
Well=2C I'm not a developer=2C but I think that the jail framework surely d=
eservestobe evolved in something more "friendly" from a sysadmin's point of=
 view.
The architecture is great=2C and that's just enough to consolidate a lot of=
 workloads=2Cbut for some applications there are features (resource contain=
ers=2C offline andonline migration of jails=2C etc.) that need to be improv=
ed to be affordable in aproduction environment.
I think that a lot of work is getting done (resource container and virtuali=
zationstack projects have ben just sponsored by the FreeBSD Foundation)=2C =
I do not knowhow much time will take to reach a complete "business-ready" v=
irtualizationframework=2C neither if they are on the right path=2C but I'm =
quite confident=2C because I'msure that the simplicity of the FreeBSD solut=
ion will rule any other virtualizationframework out there.
As the feature you are asking for=2C I think that resource containers and o=
fflinemigration should be considered first=2C because overall they'll have =
more impact onbusiness environments. Further=2C I believe that building a h=
ot migration procedureworking with third-party running applications will be=
 a very complex task to achieve=2Cmaybe too expensive at this time=2C compa=
red to the amount of work required.
That's an interesting argument=2C I'll be glad if more member of the Commun=
ity willcontribute with their considerations.
Sincerely.

Andrew
 		 	   		  =



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?SNT139-w26186EAFF90CA493C82CEEF6740>