Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:18:39 +0900
From:      Daichi GOTO <daichi@freebsd.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Cc:        daichi@jp.freebsd.org, java@freebsd.org, Maho NAKATA <chat95@mac.com>
Subject:   Re: Building java/jdk16 and jdk15 inside FreeBSD jail
Message-ID:  <499EBBBF.2050105@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <499E4C02.7050004@icyb.net.ua>
References:  <20090202.165004.71135074.chat95@mac.com>	<4987AF4F.7050301@jp.freebsd.org>	<4988414C.8060806@icyb.net.ua> <20090220.141648.143710352.chat95@mac.com> <499E4C02.7050004@icyb.net.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 20/02/2009 07:16 Maho NAKATA said the following:
>> Hm, Andriy, nullfs on ZFS might work?
>> Still my environment is UFS2, so I'll try when I switched to ZFS...
>> thanks
> 
> My understanding is that nullfs should work even better with UFS, so I
> am guessing that your problem might not be caused nullfs.

 From my opinion, I am doubting that read-write unionfs works
stably and correctly even on heavy situations. JIMO, current
implementation of nullfs essentially has unstable seen while
heavy read-write situations.

If you want to use nullfs, read-only mode is better even for
heavy situation :)

Thanks

-- 
   Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?499EBBBF.2050105>