Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:34:57 -0500 From: "Nikolas Britton" <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> To: "Ronald Klop" <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Xen Dom0, are we making progress? Message-ID: <ef10de9a0703121334t3af7daecw977dc1916d86ba52@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <op.to3c4aos8527sy@guido.klop.ws> References: <ef10de9a0703121216k1035481bwc7df222a92b44400@mail.gmail.com> <op.to3c4aos8527sy@guido.klop.ws>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/12/07, Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:16:32 +0100, Nikolas Britton > <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is FreeBSD making any progress in Xen Dom0 / Intel VT support? I'd > > really like to consolidate some underutilized FreeBSD servers. Are > > their any alternative solutions that will enable me to do this kind of > > stuff with FreeBSD, or would it be better to go with Solaris Dom0 + > > FreeBSD DomU? > > http://docs.freebsd.org/44doc/papers/jail/jail.html > google: jail freebsd > Yes I'd like to know more about jails, is there a high level / executive summary type document that I can read somewhere? From what I remember jails are mostly designed to partition stuff... for security reasons. What I'd really love to do is split up each service (httpd, postgres, samba/nfs, ldap/nis, asterisk, etc.) into discrete virtual machines. It's too much work trying to make them all play nice on one system, especially during upgrades. As it is right now I don't upgrade any services once a system is in production use.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ef10de9a0703121334t3af7daecw977dc1916d86ba52>