Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:59:53 +0100
From:      krad <kraduk@googlemail.com>
To:        Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com>
Cc:        Aiza <aiza21@comclark.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Vincent Hoffman <vince@unsane.co.uk>
Subject:   Re: new jail utility is available. announcement.
Message-ID:  <AANLkTilfiCcCU4mqHwBPydloSUOLHaaA7v8Ksiipv0WE@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimfo5MSIExd0NvmTnjCRgBFi26h0nRVF0tgJgty@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4C452644.6060508@comclark.com> <20100720134205.3168f4f1@scorpio> <4C45EA1C.6070601@comclark.com> <20100720153209.74ec26e6@scorpio> <4C45FCE1.7010006@comclark.com> <20100720163651.0daf727d@scorpio> <AANLkTine1n4rMfnWd-oiQHe1PY2mBtGDpMdGgI_W0TR4@mail.gmail.com> <4C46BAAD.5000507@unsane.co.uk> <4C46C356.6000101@comclark.com> <AANLkTimfo5MSIExd0NvmTnjCRgBFi26h0nRVF0tgJgty@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22 July 2010 02:16, Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Aiza <aiza21@comclark.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >  Not yet, when I have a spare box I might, although I quite like using
> >> zfs for jails as you can limit the disk usage dynamically per zfs
> >> filesystem and I didnt see any support there yet, even basic support
> >> like there is with ezjail would be nice.
> >>
> >>
> > Zfs was left out because its over kill. Sparse image jails gives the same
> > protection at a 10th of the overhead.
>
>
> You didn't factor in slowness due to having a file-backed filesystem.
>  While
> probably pretty low, it's definitely there and not good in an io heavy
> jail.  Also, the host will have to mount a UFS based FS, and cache it so
> you're going to have increased memory usage.
>
> Ideal setup for an io intensive jaill(eg database) is to be bound to
> compressed ZFS file-system, not a sparse image located on such a setup.
>
> even better when we get zfs v22 as we will have dedup. THat has its own
memory issues though.



> I'm not sure what overhead you're referring too.  If it's hard to tie into
> your application, you are probably correct, but from a host perspective you
> are increasing overhead.
>
> There are advantages to sparse or raw file as well, it would be nice to
> have
> a choice.
>
> --
> Adam Vande More
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
> freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTilfiCcCU4mqHwBPydloSUOLHaaA7v8Ksiipv0WE>