Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:04:26 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel level virtualisation requirements. Message-ID: <4712845A.3090508@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <47121A04.9010407@quip.cz> References: <470E5BFB.4050903@elischer.org> <47109F59.30602@quip.cz> <20071014121635.5adc1f19@deskjail> <47121A04.9010407@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Miroslav Lachman wrote: > Alexander Leidinger wrote: > >> Quoting Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> (Sat, 13 Oct 2007 12:35:05 >> +0200): > > [...] >>> It would be nice to have something from vserver, something from >>> zones, from xen, from jails etc. >>> From my point of view: >>> >>> CPU limits - specified as relative part of shares (container can get >>> more CPU power if CPU is not 100% loaded) or set to absolute >>> (container can't get more than specified CPU power, so one can use it >>> to test applications on slow CPUs etc.) >>> >>> Memory limits - same as CPU >>> >>> Disk - it would be nice if I can set how many disk space each >>> container can use. (with similar interface as disk quotas - soft+hard >>> limits and space+inodes). Maybe setting of disk I/O in similar style >>> as CPU and memory limits above. >> >> >> You can have something like this already with zfs. Just for >> information, it doesn't mean we don't need to talk about this point. > > I did not have enough time to play with FreeBSD 7 and ZFS. It is good to > know we have it yet. :) > >>> UIDs - independent UIDs in containers. In relation to UIDs, one can >>> use disk quotas inside containers. >> >> >> Can you please clarify what you mean here? Are you talking about the >> current quota support and how it handles UIDs on the host? If your disk >> proposal above is implemented, I can imagine that the current quota >> stuff is independent from this and wouldn't need a decoupling from UIDs >> in a jail from the UIDs on the host. > > Yes I was talking about current quota support na UIDs on host. If I have > UID 1001 on host and UID 1001 in two jails on same mountpoint, current > quotas can not be used. Or am I wrong? > >>> Network bandwidth - same as CPU and memory >> >> >> We have this already with dummynet and/or pf, don't we? > > OK, you are right, one can do this with dummynet or pf in simple jail > config, but with hierarchical structer, multiple IPs etc. Will it be > still usable? Maybe just implement some layer/utility to wrap around > container (jail) settings and generate proper dummynet / pf rules will > be enough. in vimage each virtual instance has its own firewalls. > > Miroslav Lachman > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4712845A.3090508>